


^oo^ 






* N ^ .# 

\.> ^ ^ ' ° A 

' . . T- <P C^ ■*■ 






\ -4- 







'^- ,<<^' 



fi \, 



'^ % '^^:''^%^^ ^^ '^' %^ 




The 

Greatest American 

Alexander Hamilton 

An Historical Analysis of his Life and 

Works together with a Symposium of 

Opinions by Distinguished Americans 

By 

Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg 



Illustrated 



G. P. Putnam's Sons 

New York and London 

Zbc Ikntcherbocfter {press 

1921 






Copyright, 192 1 

by 

Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg 

Printed in the United States of America 



]CT 31 1921 



a;^ 




013I.A630053 



To 

THE HAMILTON CLUB 
OF CHICAGO 

WHICH, BY NAME AND HABIT, HAS DONE 

MORE THAN ANY OTHER AMERICAN 

GROUP TO PERPETUATE THE 

MEMORY AND DOCTRINES 

OF 

"THE GREATEST AMERICAN" 

THIS VOLUME IS RESPECTFULLY 
DEDICATED 




c^^t 



THE WHITE HOUSE 

WASHINGTON 



March 25, 1921. 

My dear Mr. Yandeiiberg: 

I am deeply interested to taiow con- 
cerning your proposal to impress modem America with 
the Nation's debt to Alexander Hamilton. It is a 
most worthy xindertaking and it affords me particular 
satisfaction to know tint you have taken up this 
undischarged obligation. No man's life ever gave me 
greater inspiration than Hamilton's; and no man's 
life ever made greater contribution to the founding 
and the functioning of constitutional America. The 
greater modem familiarity with Hamiltonism may 
become, the greater will be modem fidelities to 
essential American institutions. 

Very truly yours. 



Mr. Arthur H. Vandenberg, 
Grand Hapids, Michigan. 




FOREWORD 

I PRESENT this study to the American people in 
the profound hope that, by virtue of its novelty if 
not its merits, it may challenge some new measure 
of popular attention to the history of the United 
States. The greater our common familiarity with 
the sacrifices, the hardships, the heroisms, the 
martyrdoms, the aspirations, the evolutions, the 
visions, the victories that have made America, 
the greater will be our common respect for the con- 
sequent institutions that are our fortunate inherit- 
ance. By the same token, lack of one breeds 
lack of the other; and we are suffering today an 
unhappy poverty in both. 

We modernists too frequently are prone to 
scorn history as a useless record of dead things — 
a mere lamp astern. We are complacent, epochal 
egotists, pretending that our own transient age 
has leaped beyond the reach of any utility the 
yesterdays might recommend. Because it is the 
easiest way, we are apt to ape the ignorance which, 

vii 



jForetDorb 

for want of willingness to learn, has no alternative 
but to boast a blithe indifference to history, and 
style its lessons useless. 

Yet the Bible is no more to religion than his- 
tory is to the United States. Within it are wrapped 
the mighty inspirations that have made us what 
we are. To worship this past, with eyes rolled 
always backward, would be vain idolatry. But 
to ignore it is purblind folly. Even granting 
Lamartine's cynicism that "historians, as a rule, 
show us more of art than veracity in their produc- 
tions," still Montaigne is right in calling history 
"the very anatomy of philosophy" with its 
"patterns to imitate" — quoting Jimius — and its 
"examples to deter." 

We shall never graduate into greater sublimity 
of character than has chaptered the whole past 
story of our land; and from no more wholesome 
source than this can we borrow strength and pre- 
cept for the crises yet to come. If the trend of the 
times portends a drift away from the foundations 
that have borne the temple of popular government 
for nearly 1 50 years, we must not expect a resump- 
tion of these vitally essential fidelities except as 
we create a mass understanding of what these 
foundations were when the Fathers set them in 

viii 



jforetoorb 

the ages. If the trend of the times confesses lightly 
valued citizenship, the cure is to renew a mass 
appreciation of what this citizenship has cost. If 
we need purified standards of unselfish devotion in 
our seats of the mighty, there are no models that 
excel those with which American history is jeweled. 
If the familiar cry — "Back To The Constitution" 
— is an apostrophe to sanity and wisdom, the story 
of the Constitution is the starting point for the 
crusades. In a word, no one thing would go far- 
ther or do more toward Americanizing America 
than to make American History fashionable. A 
discerning California millionaire is planning to 
endow a movement to popularize the study of 
science. The millionaire who endows an "Ameri- 
can History Foundation" — dedicated to a wider 
mass acquaintance with the stupendous story of 
the United States — will turn his excess funds to 
rare account. 

This life-story of the nation is best written and 
reflected in the lives of its great men. The achieve- 
ments of peoples and periods are lived in the 
careers of their dominant leaders. Thomas 
Carlyle has said: "Universal history is at bottom 
the history of the great men who have worked 
here. . . . The soul of the whole world's his- 

ix 



tory, it may justly be considered, were the history 
of these. . . . Could we see them well, we 
should get some glimpses into the very marrow of 
the world's history." Every great event in the 
evolution of a nation is the lengthened shadow of 
some man or set of men for whom the event is the 
expression of character and the reflex of aspiration. 
The event is cold and second-hand as compared 
with the warm, pulsating, human flesh and blood 
that gave it genesis. The event is a distant, ab- 
stract thing which soon becomes a mere item in 
chronology and is accepted with perfimctory grace 
as a thing that "happened" without particular 
travail and in the due unfolding of an automatic 
destiny. But the human genius and courage and 
wisdom and will that ordered the event are living, 
throbbing, dynamic emotions which awaken re- 
sponsive sensations in human hearts all down the 
calendars of posterity and register an intimate and 
lasting appreciation of what the birth and re-birth 
of a nation costs. The best and most useful 
laboratory for historical research and reaction, 
then, is in the biographies of the men who made, 
rather than in the observations of those who write, 
history. If, by a confessedly startling challenge to 
habitual American public opinion in m}^ nomination 



jforetoorb 

of "The Greatest American," I shall succeed in 
sending my countrymen to the biographies of their 
own favorite figures in American history, seeking 
renewed and refreshed knowledge with which to 
rebut my conclusions, this volume will not have 
failed its monitorial ambitions. 

But this challenge has another and scarcely 
secondary purpose. The twentieth century, in 
America, and the eighteenth century are farther 
apart, more remote one from the other, than any 
other tw^o connated cycles in history. As a re- 
sult, the busy modem generations of today yield 
scant acknowledgments to the superlative men of 
those distant, inchoative days which put down the 
rock foimdations upon which all institutional 
America has been erected, and upon which our 
society leans, confidently but all too thoughtlessly, 
today. Among these men, none holds us in more 
completely unrequited debt than Alexander 
Hamilton. America's persistent failure to pay his 
memory an historical obligation beyond adequate 
measurement in words is the most glaring of all 
the Republic's ingratitudes. 

In his great book upon the origin and growth of 
the Constitution, Hannis Taylor bemoans the fact 
that posterity has never given Pelatiah Webster 

xi 



iforetoorb 

proper credits for his pioneering part in charting 
our Constitutional experiment. "In all this," 
observes Taylor, "there is nothing out of the 
usual course. The achievements of contemplative 
men, especially when they are far-reaching, have 
often had to wait for a long time for full recogni- 
tion. Not until after the lapse of 200 years 
was it admitted that Velasquez was one of the 
mightiest painters the world had ever known; it 
was quite as long perhaps before Shakespeare, as 
a world poet, was permitted to enter into the full 
possession of his kingdom." If this philosophy 
fits Pelatiah Webster, how much more does it fit 
Alexander Hamilton! If I shall succeed in turn- 
ing an even casual illumination upon this man and 
this national debt, even though few among you 
agree with the extremes of my conclusions, there 
will have been ample justification for this 
undertaking. 

This is the question that I ask. What man, all 
things considered, in the whole history of our coun- 
try down to date, is best entitled to be called 
"The Greatest American?" To answer is not an 
easy task. There are varying elements of great- 
ness. Sometimes there is a well-nigh irreconcil- 
able conflict between the coimter-claims of favored 

xii 



jforetaorb 

eligibles. The relative importance of eras and 
periods must be resolved. Perfectly natural and 
normal himian sympathies and prejudices bring 
their astigmatic influences to bear. Some say that 
there is no such thing as exclusive and paramount 
pre-eminence for any one, great man ; that defens- 
ible answer to such a hypothetical question is 
impossible. Some even say the pursuit is absurd. 
But I respectfully insist, for the ample reasons 
given, that there is a real utility to be served ; and 
that, upon the basis of exhibits subsequent hereto, 
it is possible to catch and reflect the sub-conscious 
verdict of our people. It may not be possible to 
sustain an argument at every point of test. Nearly 
all of us have predilections; and nearly all of us 
have built a shrine within our hearts and souls to 
some one favorite above all others. But it is good 
for us to submit our convictions, in these respects, 
to comparative scrutiny. It is worth-while for 
us to catechize our historical opinions. Who is 
"The Greatest American": and why? 

The first section of this book is a symposium in 
which representative men of today, each with 
some peculiar authority of opinion, report their 
answers to my question. I am eternally grateful 
to all of them for the fine spirit in which they have 

xiii 



jforetDorb 

joined in this academic chase. I have been both 
honored and encouraged by their interest and 
their helpfulness. The compilation of their views 
is a valuable contribution to the shelves of 
history, if no further credit may ever be assessed 
to this undertaking. 

The second section is a study of the life of 
Hamilton, presented, I make bold to believe, in a 
new fashion, and in justification of my own pro- 
found faith that, all things considered, he, above 
all others, has earned the right to pre-eminent 
American historical distinction. Those who can- 
not yield consent to my verdict will, I trust, at 
least yield a new measure of acknowledgment to 
the memory of this brilliant statesman-soldier- 
publicist who flamed like a meteor across colonial 
skies, and, changing metaphors, taught our 
swaddling Republic first to creep and then to walk. 

I have made free draft upon all available 
Hamiltonian authorities, with scrupulous foot- 
note efforts to grant specific credits wherever due. 
But I cannot leave to mere footnotes an ade- 
quate expression of my obligation to certain out- 
standing works of superior utility. First, I would 
say that when Gertrude Atherton wrote The Con- 
queror, the life of Hamilton in fiction form, she 

xiv 



jforetoorb 

wrote what is, to date, the great American novel. 
Never did any writer more brilliantly prove my 
contention that biography can make history palat- 
able to the most fickle appetite. "In all the fairy 
tales," Hamilton Wright Mabie once wrote in his 
introduction to a book entitled Men Who Have 
Risen, "there is nothing more wonderful than the 
contrast between Franklin, the printer's appren- 
tice, and Franklin, the chief figure in the most 
brilliant city in the world; between Lincoln, float- 
ing down the Ohio on a flat-boat, and Lincoln, 
liberating with a stroke of the pen 4,000,000 
slaves." Nor is there anything more wonderful 
than the contrast between Hamilton, a friendless 
immigrant upon the docks of Boston at the tender 
age of fifteen, and Hamilton, by sheer force of 
himian intellect, whip -lashing a snarling New 
York Convention majority into unwilling sub- 
mission to the Constitution, at the age of thirty- 
one. This is the theme that The Conqueror has 
developed in a masterly, fascinating way that 
wholly justifies its title. 

Then, I am indebted to the fine understanding 
of Hamilton that has been evidenced by United 
States Senator Henry Cabot Lodge in his Life of 
Hamilton and in "bhe edition of The Works of Alex- 

XV 



jforetDorb 

ander Hamilton which he ably edited. Again, the 
most sympathetic and discerning study of Hamil- 
ton's influence upon his time and upon posterity 
is the remarkable Essay on American Union from 
the pen of Frederick Scott Oliver, a Briton, writ- 
ing in 1906 at Checkendon Court, Oxfordshire. 
The History of The Republic of The United States of 
America as Traced in the Writings of Alexander 
Hamilton and His Co-Temporaries, by John C. 
Hamilton, his son, in 1857, and the son's biography 
of his distinguished sire, written in 1834, have been 
extremely valuable. These and many other refer- 
ences have made their liberal contribution to this 
compendiimi. 

Who is "The Greatest American"? If it be 
Alexander Hamilton, it is a type that exalteth a 
nation. If it be some other among the super-men 
whom destiny seems to have raised for each suc- 
ceeding crisis, no greater compliment may be his 
than to assert that he exceeds Hamilton in his 
deserts. To the tolerant and thoughtful contem- 
plation of my fellow-countrymen, these pages are 
committed. 

Arthur Hendrick Vandenberg. 

Grand Rapids, Michigan, 
February 4, 1921. 

xvi 



Foreword . 



Contents! 



PACE 

vii 



PART ONE 

Lincoln 

Washington 

Others ...... 

PART TWO— HAMILTON 

Introduction ..... 
From Birth to Death 
The Master Builder of American Union 
The Federalist ..... 
The Founder of the Public Credit . 
First in Literature and Law . 
The Great Soldier .... 
Prophetic Paragraphs 



3 
26 

43 



67 

74 

109 

143 
173 
206 
240 
260 



PART THREE 



Conclusion 
Index . 



301 
349 



xvu 



Mnitvationi 



PAGE 

Alexander Hamilton . . Frontispiece 

Etched by Jacques Reich. 

President Harding's Letter . . . . vii 

The Hamilton Coat-of-Arms .... 67 

The House where Hamilton was Born, St. 
Croix, Nevis Island ..... 74 

From Life of Alexander Hamilton, by Allen McLane. 
Permission of Charles Scribner's Sons. 

The Hamilton Monument at Weehawken, New 
Jersey ........ 106 

The Hamilton "Float" in Parade, 1788, Cele- 
brating the Ratification of the Constitution 130 

The First Meeting between George Washing- 
ton AND Hamilton ...... 242 

Prom the picture by Chappell. 

The Hamilton Statue on Hamilton College 
Campus at Clinton, New York . . . 280 

-xix 



3[(llu£(trattons( 



PAGE 



Mrs. Alexander Hamilton . . . . 292 

From the picture by Inman. 

Hamilton's Tomb in Trinity Churchyard, New 
York City ....... 296 

Model of the Hamilton Statue to be Placed 
ON the Treasury Plaza, Washington . . 341 



XK 



PART ONE 



JLimoln 



'The kindly, earnest, brave, fore-seeing man, 

Sagacious, patient, dreading praise, not blame. 
New birth from our new soil, the first American." 



Herbert Putnam, for twenty years the 
Librarian of Congress in Washington, nominates 
Abraham Lincoln as the man who, all things con- 
sidered, encompassing the entire story of the Re- 
public down to date, is entitled to pre-eminence 
as "The Greatest American." Mr. Putnam goes 
back to that famous Harvard hour on July 21, 
1865, when James Russell Lowell delivered his 
inimitable "Commemoration Ode" wherein the 
poet sang his inspired apostrophe to the martyred 
President who three months before had given his 
blessed life to his cotmtry. To "hang my wreath 
on his world-honored urn " was Lowell's dedication. 

' ' Here was a type of the true elder race, 
And one of Plutarch's men talked with us face to 
face." 

3 



®f)c i^reatesit American 

Mr. Putnam contents himself, in answering the 
question which is at the root of this symposium, 
with quoting Lowell's beautifully truthful lines 
noted at the head of this chapter. That they 
nominate "the first American," without the neces- 
sity even of calling him by name, to the satisfac- 
tion of a majority of the people of modem America 
is amply testified by the fruits of my inspection. 
Even those of us, myself among the niimber, who 
finally give paramount consideration to some 
other among the Titans who have gloriously served 
the Republic in hour of crisis, have no quarrel with 
the majority verdict which thus is rendered. It 
can be defended in any forum and justified in any 
court. Too great honor cannot be accorded this 
Mortal Saviour who deserved every word of 
epitomized eulogy with which Secretary Gideon 
Welles annoimced his death to the American Navy : 
"To him our gratitude was justly due, for to him, 
under God, more than to any other person, are 
we indebted for the successful vindication of the 
integrity of the Union and the maintenance of the 
power of the Republic.'" 

That a nation-wide referendiim woiild return 
its popular majority in Lincoln's favor, if this 

^General Order No. 51, April 15, 1865. 

4 



^f)t (Greatest iSmerican 

academic quest coiild be answered in the voting 
places of the nation, is indicated by the trend of 
answers that have come to me as I have asked 
leaders in the contemporary thought of the United 
States to assist me in putting down this record. 

"I think our greatest American was Abraham 
Lincoln," says William Allen White, the brilliant 
Kansas Journalist. "He is the greatest because 
he comes nearest to the American ideal. If I were 
speaking of the most typical American, it would be 
Theodore Roosevelt. But he is not our greatest 
American, nor does he approach the American 
ideal so nearly as Lincoln. Lincoln is the greatest 
man this modern age has seen. He is great be- 
cause he was simple; simple because he was kind." 

"Comparisons are odious," observes President 
William Goodell Frost of Berea College, Berea, 
Kentucky. "They are often misleading. But 
Lincoln seems to me the man whom we should 
name as the greatest American because he was so 
distinctly American, because he represented the 
north, south, east and west more perfectly than 
any other, because he surmounted the greatest 
difficulties, met the greatest emergencies, and left 
the deepest impress in the institutions and ideals 
of our country." 

5 



tlDfje ^xtattsit ilmerican 

"America has produced a number of great men, 
a nimiber of men who in their fields outshone all 
others," declares Samuel Gompers, President of 
the American Federation of Labor for nearly four 
decades. "But it has always been my conviction 
that the greatest of all was Lincoln. No other 
reached to such heights in so many ways. Lin- 
coln's character and his work must be, for all time, 
inspiring to Americans as the highest example 
our coimtry has produced." 

Though Mr. Gompers and Governor Henry J. 
Allen of Kansas differ violently in other things — 
with an eye particularly to the spirited controversy 
between them over the principles involved in the 
Kansas Industrial Judicature Act — in this present 
matter their minds meet. "Both because of 
what he was and of what he did," says Governor 
Allen, "I regard Abraham Lincoln as the greatest 
American. The world is full of great intellectual 
accomplishments. American life has afforded a 
proud share of these. Our history has been en- 
riched by great genius in science, by great worth in 
literature, by great courage in its military his- 
tory; but there is about Lincoln a quality which 
sets him apart. In my judgment he is the first 
typical American, the first who ever contained 

6 



within himself all the strength and all the gentleness 
of the Republic. It takes so many things to make 
greatness. Many Americans have been greater 
in some things than was Lincoln, but in all the 
qualities which roimd him out and make him fit 
for the high place you are creating for an American, 
the simi total of Lincoln's qualities casts the ma- 
jority. We have been blessed by many great 
Americans. I would like to vote for Roosevelt for 
many reasons. For many reasons I would like to 
vote for Washington. For some reasons I would 
like to vote for Alexander Hamilton. Some other 
times I'd like to be for Edison. In other moods 
I'd like to be for Longfellow and sometimes I think 
of Wendell Phillips; and sometimes the greatness 
of the courage of a limatic by the name of John 
Brown overwhelms me. But in the natural evolu- 
tion of events we were bound to have a man like 
Washington. We were boimd to have great scien- 
tists, great writers, great orators, great soldiers ; but 
I think that only divine providence could have 
given us for a great hour of need a man who took 
possession of the hour and lived up to all of its de- 
mands in a perfectly human fashion as did Abraham 
Lincoln. Certainly the period through which we 
have just passed produced no such result." 

7 



Wl)t (greatesft American 

Governor Allen speaks of Thomas A. Edison, 
whose rich genius has contributed so prodigally to 
the progress and convenience of the modem era. 
Edison himself, asked to nominate the greatest 
American, promptly and imequi vocally replies with 
the name of Lincoln. 

With similar expressive and unqualified finality, 
Lincoln's eminence comes back to me in one single 
magic word from President John Grier Hibben of 
Princeton University ; from ex-United States Sena- 
tor Lawrence Y. Sherman of Illinois; from Rev. 
Newell Dwight Hillis of Brooklyn's Plymouth 
Church; from President F. W. Gimsaulus of the 
Armour Institute of Technology in Chicago; from 
the learned and honored Charles W. Eliot, for 
forty years the President of Harvard University; 
from Dr. Marion L. Burton, now President of the 
Univeristy of Michigan ; from Dr. Henry Churchill 
King, President of Oberlin College in Ohio; from 
Dr. John Huston Finley, formerly New York State 
Commissioner of Education and President of the 
University of the State of New York, and more 
recently associated with the New York Times; 
from ex-United States Senator William Alden 
Smith of Michigan ; from Franklin K. Lane, Secre- 
tary of the Interior in the Cabinet of President 

8 



Wilson; from United States Senator Philander C. 
Knox of Pennsylvania; from Dr. H. M. Bell, 
President Emeritus of Drake University in Iowa; 
from Major General Enoch H. Crowder, honored 
veteran of American participation in the great 
world war; from ex-President Harry B. Hutchins 
of the University of Michigan; from United States 
Senator Knute Nelson of Minnesota; from Henry 
L. Stoddard, Editor of the New York Mail; from 
United States Senator Arthur Capper of Kansas; 
and from John Hays Hammond, the world famous 
engineer. 

This is an imposing jury. Such a diversity of 
high advocates does supreme honor to the memory 
of any man. It has come to pass quite as prophe- 
sied in Senator Simmer's resolution from the un- 
official special committee (Lincoln's death occurred 
during a congressional recess) appointed from the 
thirty -ninth Congress on April 17, 1865, "that in 
the life of Abraham Lincoln, who by the benignant 
favor of republican institutions rose from humble 
beginnings to the heights of power and fame" 
there is to be recognized "an example of purity, 
simplicity, and virtue which should be a lesson to 
mankind," while in his death there is to be recog- 
nized "a martyr whose memory will become more 

9 



precious as men learn to prize those principles of 
constitutional order and those rights — civil, politi- 
cal, and human — for which he was made a sacrifice." 

Winston Churchill, the great American novelist 
whose writings disclose an intimate understanding 
of his country's history, puts his opinion in this 
fashion: "Abraham Lincoln; to my mind, in addi- 
tion to great gifts of statesmanship, he had the 
quality of selflessness which is real greatness, and 
the knowledge of men that comes from love." 

Proclaiming the difficulty of considering "all 
things" in measuring the relative eminence of 
leaders, United States Senator Gilbert M. Hitchcock 
of Nebraska says: "Giving due weight to his 
enormous responsibility, to the difficulties of his 
position, to the immense importance of the out- 
come, and to his combination of moral force, 
remarkable tact, and intellectual strength, I 
nominate Abraham Lincoln as the greatest Ameri- 
can of history." 

The late Bishop Charles Sumner Burch of New 
York declared his belief in Lincoln's super-emi- 
nence "not because of his wonderful accomplish- 
ment in the face of the most trying difficulties, to 
free the slaves and save the Union, but because 
of his influence over the entire English-speaking 

10 



t!Df)c (^reatesit ^mtvitan 

world. He was a man of vision and a man who 
had the capacity for putting his vision into accom- 
pHshment. Next to Abraham Lincoln, I regard 
Theodore Roosevelt as the greatest American." 

Not the least striking thing disclosed in the 
catalogue of Lincoln nominators is the fashion in 
which extremes meet and find a common ground in 
their addresses to his memory. John D. Rocke- 
feller, Jr., promptly answers "Lincoln" upon this 
roll-call. No less promptly does Upton Sinclair, 
the antithesis of Rockefeller, respond that "the 
greatest American in wise kindness was probably 
Abraham Lincoln, that is, he was the one who 
managed to make these qualities most effective in 
the world." Sinclair adds: "He was killed, and 
there has been very little of either wisdom or kind- 
ness that has been effective in America since his 
death." 

Again, there is adulatory eloquence in parallel- 
ing the verdicts of John Spargo, one of the greatest 
Socialists America has ever produced, and Thomas 
W. Lamont, one of the greatest of America's 
modem capitalists. 

"It is very difficult to answer such a question 
with any degree of authority or finality," writes 
Spargo. "Not only have there been many men 

II 



Cte (^reategt American 

remarkable for their great gifts of statesmanship, 
but the question involves greater difficulties than 
mere selection between individuals. For example, 
if we grant the greatness of Lincoln and his wisdom 
in meeting the critical problems of his time, can 
there be any positive assurance that he would have 
met with equal success the greater problems of 
the world war recently ended? All in all, if I were 
obliged to make such a selection, I should, I th'nk, 
decide for Lincoln. His fine fidelity to the basic 
ideals of America, would, alone, place him upon 
the pinnacle of my affectionate and reverent re- 
gard. To that great quality must be added a 
statesmanlike wisdom in dealing with the practical 
problems of his day, amounting to real genius." 

"Most Americans," writes Lamont, "called 
upon to answer your question by naming their 
country's greatest man must, I believe, hesitate 
between its founder and its preserver. Washing- 
ton was a great soldier whose military triumphs, 
joined to a patient and wise leadership, founded 
the nation. Lincoln was a great statesman who 
directed military power and moral force to the 
preservation of the state and the destruction of 
human slavery within it. Varied in personality, 
temperament and method, George Washington 

12 



and Abraham Lincoln were shown by heroic tests 
to share the same basic gifts and virtues — vision, 
faith, courage, fortitude, patience and human 
sjnnpathy. Both hold our reverent admiration. 
But Lincoln, through the tragedy of life among a 
divided people and of death by assassination, 
touches our hearts more nearly. Therefore, if 
between these two sublime personalities we must 
make decision, sympathy is likely to lead us to 
declare Lincoln the greatest American." 

United States Senator Hiram W. Johnson of 
California confronts this same dual appeal in 
analyzing his judgment. "Had you asked me to 
place two Americans on the highest eminence of 
greatness, I would have had little difficulty," says 
Johnson. "Washington and Lincoln typify Ameri- 
can greatness. They represent, however, such 
different types that it is almost impossible to place 
one before the other. If you insist upon the 
choice, my temperament would place Lincoln 
first, although my judgment would rebel at making 
a choice between the two." 

Professor Andrew G. McLaughlin, head of the 
history department of the University of Chicago 
and editor of many historical publications, is con- 
tent to observe, "I suppose Lincoln is the greatest 

13 



^\)t (Greatest American 

American, but I don't know." He adds that both 
Washington and Jefferson deserve close study ere 
the die is cast. 

President C. A. Richmond of Union College, 
Schenectady, says: "I have no hesitation in saying 
that no one in our history embodies so much that 
is highest and most distinctive in our American 
life as Abraham Lincoln." 

President Ernest M. Hopkins of Dartmouth 
College, the traditional collegiate shrine of Daniel 
Webster, protests that it is practically impossible 
to give any designation for the title of ' ' the great- 
est American" without implying large injustice 
to many others than the man named. However, 
President Hopkins expresses the personal convic- 
tion that Abraham Lincoln nearest justifies such 
exaltation. 

Chancellor James R. Day of Syracuse Univer- 
sity, disliking to select any one of the great men of 
America as the greatest, says: "However, I have 
cherished the thought for some time that Lincoln 
was the great composite character of Americans, 
and I would be forced to say that it is my conviction 
that he is the greatest American." 

Rev. Henry N. Couden, blind Chaplain of the 
House of Representatives in Washington, a patriot 

14 



^fje (Greatest American 

who last saw his country's flag upon the field of 
battle, and a scholar who has had unusual oppor- 
tunities to study public service in its processes 
of rendition, unhesitatingly pronounces Lincoln's 
name in answer to my question. "I am quite 
familiar," says he, "with the leading Americans 
and I place Lincoln at the top of the men who have 
done things that live. All things considered, he is 
the greatest of them all and the service he rendered 
his country is unparalleled. God bless his name 
and may he be ever an example to the American 
youth." 

Ex-Governor Chase S. Osborn of Michigan, 
brilliant in a diversity of talents, replies with 
typical vigor. "I pronounce Abraham Lincoln 
the greatest American. Not one other has been 
in his sphere. He alone was anointed of God 
with crystal superiority at a time when the God 
forces of America needed leading as never before or 
since. Lincoln sprang from the lowly. He guided 
the nation through the greatest peril that ever 
threatened the destruction of a grouped people. 
But words are as nothing. Washington was not 
an American. He was a colonial British aristo- 
crat who was fortified from Heaven diiring the 
agonizing and prolonged birth throes of a nation. 

15 



^fje (ireatesft American 

He welded with blood and courage and love three 
million people. On what could easily have been 
the death bed of America, Lincoln saved the co- 
hesive lives of thirty millions." 

Ex-Governor Frank O. Lowden, from the great 
commonwealth of Illinois which boasts Lincoln as 
an adopted son, imhesitatingly joins the symphony 
of Lincoln praise. For Governor Lowden, Lincoln 
was and is the greatest American. Speaking be- 
fore the Middlesex Club in Boston upon an an- 
niversary' of Lincoln's birth he referred back to 
Lowell's "Commemoration Ode" and upon it 
built a tribute endorsing all that Lowell had simg. 
A year before, upon similar occasion, he had said: 
"The cause of democracy is the cause of humanity. 
It concerns itself with the welfare of the average 
man. Lincoln was its finest product. In life, he 
was its noblest champion. In death, he became its 
saint. His tomb is now its shrine. His country's 
cause, for which he lived and died, has now become 
the cause of all the world. It is more than half a 
century since his countrymen, with reverent heads, 
bore him to his grave. And still his pitiless logic 
for the right, his serene faith in God and man, are 
the surest weapons with which democracy, hu- 

' February 12, 1919. 

16 



TO^ i^reatejst American 

manity and righteousness now fight their ancient 
foe. . . . Lincoln's spirit still walks the earth. 
His life remains the greatest resource to the forces 
fighting for freedom and righteousness throughout 
the world." 

John R. Rathom, Editor of the Providence 
Journal and Bulletin and one of the prominent 
journalists of today, declares that Lincoln is 
justly entitled to be known as the greatest Ameri- 
can. " It is imf ortimate, ' ' observes Rathom, ' ' that 
Lincoln's name has been used so much by poli- 
ticians and stump orators for their own personal 
ends and their own selfish ambitions. But the fact 
remains that Lincoln's typical rise from apparently 
hopeless surroundings, the sterHng common sense 
with which he guided the coimtry through the 
greatest peril of its national life, the man's devo- 
tion to duty and his splendid patriotism must, in 
my judgment, win for him in future generations 
the title of the greatest American. No figure in 
our history ever faced such problems, ever tri- 
umphed over such violent opposition or ever 
showed such magnanimity of spirit in dealing with 
the enemies of himself and his country." 

Ex-Governor Woodbridge N. Ferris of Michi- 
gan, distinguished as an educator as well as a public 

17 



V^iit <§reates;t i^nterican 

man, declares, "without a moment's hesitation I 
say Abraham Lincoln is entitled to be called the 
greatest American. The Declaration of Inde- 
pendence is the greatest exposition of America's 
ideal. Abraham Lincoln was the incarnation of 
that ideal." 

Congressman Simeon D. Fess of Ohio, fre- 
quently referred to as the "Scholar of the House," 
illuminates his answer with telling analysis. ' ' Five 
men," says he, "stand out quite apart when judged 
by their abilities and by what they accomplished. 
First is Washington, for his achievement in lead- 
ing the army to victory, for his successful conduct 
of the federal Constitutional Convention, and for 
his inauguration of the new government. Second, 
Hamilton must remain the greatest constructive 
genius yet produced in North America. Third, 
John Marshall had most to do in guiding the new 
nation in its struggle to secure proper federal rela- 
tions between nation and state, in his wonderful 
decisions on questions of nationality. Fourth, 
Webster in a way stands out as a constructive 
lawyer and orator, whose service came at a time 
when constitutional government was on trial. His 
reply to Hayne had the effect of an amendment to 
the constitution. Lincoln completes the list. In 

i8 



tKlje (^reatesit American 

my judgment he possessed qualities of influence 
un equaled by any others. He was more American 
than any of the others. In fact, he was an Ameri- 
can product in the truest sense. Measured by 
results, I am of the opinion that Lincoln must 
stand first in America. He had all the talents of 
ability of thought, of breadth of sympathy, and 
power of will. He employed them all for the good 
of the country in the hour of her greatest crisis, and 
won a struggle which must ever be regarded the 
greatest event in the history of civil government, 
the preservation of the Union and the perpetuation 
of representative government in the world as the 
ultimate form of popular control — the greatest 
achievement yet accomplished in history. The 
work of the other leaders was but a preface to that 
of Lincoln." 

One of the leading historical authorities in 
the United States today is Professor Frederick 
J. Turner of Harvard. Professor Turner once 
dubbed Benjamin Franklin the first "great Ameri- 
can.'" But Professor Turner turns from Franklin 
to Lincoln when confronted with the selection of 
the greatest American. ' ' The greatest American, ' ' 
declares Professor Turner, "must be representa- 

' Magazine article in The Dial, Chicago, 1888, p. 204. 

19 



tKfje (^rcatesit American 

tively greatest, as well as an admittedly great man 
among those whom the world at large recognizes 
as such. He must be the greatest in ways that 
are characteristically American. By this test our 
earliest great American was Franklin, and our 
greatest was Abraham Lincoln. Washington's 
elemental greatness, his balance and judgment, 
and steadfastness, and his relation to our inde- 
pendence place him among the great men of the 
world. But the American type of Democracy — 
the Democracy that was associated with the ac- 
tivities and ideals of our pioneer age, and with our 
slavery contest, and the maintenance of our type 
of government and of society on a national scale — 
is more distinctive than our struggle for independ- 
ence, though the two are intimately connected ; and 
if it is a question of the most representative 
American on the highest plane in these respects, I 
choose Lincoln. Jefferson had too philosophical a 
mind to be quite the choice, though he was the 
prophet of American Democracy. He lacked the 
high-minded, humane quality of Lincoln also. 
Jackson was a dynamic expression of some of the 
most vital American qualities, but his personality 
does not impress me as Lincoln does. Hamilton 
had, as Talleyrand said, 'divined Europe,' but he 

20 



©fje (Creates;! ^mtxican 

had not divined America, though he was essential 
to its welfare. I doubt whether any of our scien- 
tists or men of letters have achieved the world 
place that our men of political life have achieved. 
Lincoln was, as Emerson said, the whole history 
of the American people in his time. Through his 
forebears and in his own experience he stands for 
the moving pioneer Democracy which opened a 
new continent to a new type of man. Lincoln was 
the 'new birth of our new soil, the first American,' 
as Lowell put it ; and when he calls Lincoln ' one of 
Plutarch's men' he is speaking as truly as he is 
aptly. He had a character and originality that 
rank him with the world's greatest. Moreover, 
in personifying the American type of Democracy 
and of service to society, Lincoln embodied the 
promise of the future to the Old World as well as 
the New. Roosevelt and Wilson are too near our 
own time to be seen in due perspective; but I be- 
lieve they will both live among our greatest Ameri- 
can types. On the whole, I vote for Abraham 
Lincoln." 

Veteran Congressman Cannon of Illinois, en- 
deared to millions of American hearts as "Uncle 
Joe" and personally familiar with all the great 
Americans of more than half a century, turns affec- 

21 



tKfje (Creates;! American 

tionately to Lincoln. Says he: "If we apply the 
Master's definition—* By their fruits ye shall know 
them' — I believe that Lincoln, the Emancipator 
and the Preserver of the Union, was the greatest 
American. Lincoln as President had one absorb- 
ing thought and purpose, to save the Union, with 
slavery if he must, without slavery if he could, but 
to save the Union. His singleness of purpose to 
fulfill his obligation and oath to 'preserve, protect, 
and defend the Constitution of the United States,' 
was paramount, and 'his love of country left no 
room for love of self.' 'Greater love hath no man 
than this, that a man lay down his life for his 
friends.'" 

Secretary of the Navy Edwin Denby, who while 
President of the Detroit Board of Commerce glori- 
ously demonstrated his American fidelities during 
the hard crises of world war by enlisting as a pri- 
vate in the Marines, is another to whom Lincoln 
will always be "The Greatest American." "Since 
I have been old enough to consider such subjects," 
declares Secretary Denby, "I have never varied 
in my belief. Lincoln's words and thoughts are 
woven into the very fabric of the American spirit. 
He more dominates our political thinking than any 
other man who ever lived; and his crystal clear 

22 



tIDije <§teates!t American 

enunciation of principles is rapidly being accepted 
by the world at large, as well as by the United 
States, as the last expression of true democracy." 

Rabbi Stephen S. Wise of the New York Free 
Synagogue acknowledges the difficulty of choosing 
one American supreme in service among so many 
sons and daughters of mighty stature. "But if I 
had to make a choice, which I am loath to do, I 
should name Lincoln. He was not our first, but 
he is our best and greatest. I name him the great- 
est of Americans because I believe that he more 
nearly than any other American is America in- 
carnate. The spirit of America ruled him as 
perhaps none other. Washington went before 
Lincoln and was one of the makers of America ; but 
America made Lincoln above and beyond any 
other, America's man." 

United States Senator Frank B. Willis, who suc- 
ceeded President Harding from Ohio in the Upper 
House of Congress, declares that Alexander Hamil- 
ton was the greatest constructive genius this 
country has ever seen. "Yet," he observes, "the 
question arises whether constructive ability is a 
true test of greatness. My own judgment is that 
it is not a complete test. Greatness is difficult 
to define and to prescribe a standard is still more 

23 



^i)t ^vtatt^t American 

difficult. But I venture my own opinion that, 
measured from all standpoints, Abraham Lincoln 
was our greatest American." 

John Burroughs, America's supreme modern 
naturalist, similarly nominates Lincoln. "In 
literature," he adds, "Walt Whitman is the 
greatest American." 

Ex-United States Senator Charles S. Thomas of 
Colorado speaks for Lincoln. "I answer without 
hesitation," declares the Senator. "My conclu- 
sion is based upon my own conception of his charac- 
ter, supplemented by that of Emerson and the late 
Henry W. Grady. From the standpoint of purely 
intellectual equpiment and attainment, Alexander 
Hamilton is a close second. He lacks, however, 
that touch with the soil and intimate knowledge of 
people which so characterized the career of the 
martyred President." 

The eloquent and picturesque W. Bourke 
Cockran of New York declares that Lincoln was 
not merely the greatest American who ever lived, 
but the greatest figure in all history. "In the light 
of his achievements and his opportunities — or 
rather, lack of opportimities to qualify himself for 
public service — Lincoln stands absolutely alone and 
must forever remain the phenomenon of all the 

24 



tIDfje (Creates;! American 

ages. To any one familiar with his Hfe, this con- 
clusion must be self-evident. Those who are 
ignorant of his deeds — the circumstances under 
which they were wrought — the sublime eloquence 
with which his policies were expounded, vindicated, 
made possible — the consimimate leadership by 
which they were made tritmiphant — the states- 
manship, almost inspired, which, after having 
formulated in terms never paralleled for lucidity 
the duty of a nation face to face with a crisis in- 
volving its existence, sustained it through the 
trials, reverses and sufferings of civil war and re- 
strained it in the hour of triumph within the boimds 
of a moderation which made forever secure the 
fruits of victory — and all this with no educational 
advantages whatever — should be encouraged to 
study them, not for the sake of his fame which is 
secure and certain to grow continuously till the 
end of time, but to broaden their conceptions of 
what America has contributed to the civilization 
of Christendom." 



25 



I HAVE said that I believe a majority of Ameri- 
cans rate Lincoln first among the pre-eminent men 
who have highly served the Republic. If this is 
true, as disclosed by this symposium, it is equally 
true that second only to Lincoln, George Washing- 
ton is most firmly enshrined in the hearts and 
grateful recollections of his coimtrymen. In a 
majority of instances, the argument lies between 
Washington and Lincoln. Frequently, as sub- 
sequently disclosed contemporary leaders in Ameri- 
can public thought refuse to choose between the 
two. But the paramount pre-eminence of Wash- 
ington finds none the less eloquent endorsement 
from as distinguished a roll of modern men as ever 
joined in tribute to the memory of any mighty 
contributor to the fundamental welfare of a people. 
The sentiment of Lafayette — "In my idea, General 
Washington is the greatest man; for I look upon 
him as the most virtuous" — finds profound reflec- 
tion in many a modern estimate ; and Washington's 

26 



^i)t (^ceatesit American 

own sentiment, expressed when declining a military 
escort upon the occasion of his inauguration in 
1789 — "I require no guard but the affections of 
the people" — is justified in many a modem verdict 
upon the question we discuss. 

He was "first in war, first in peace, and first in 
the hearts of his countrymen," said Henry Lee, 
back in the days that knew him by his intimate 
works. 

"I have no disposition to take issue with the 
common verdict which college boys render in these 
famiHar words," declares President John H. 
MacCracken of Lafayette College, Pennsylvania, 
nominating Washington as his greatest American. 

Referring to this same traditional and historical 
phrase with which Washington's name and fame 
will always be linked all down the avenues of time, 
Frank B. Noyes, Editor of The Washington Star 
and President of the Associated Press, declares 
himself in harmony with this stupendous senti- 
ment. "There may have been many Americans 
with as high aspirations," comments Mr. Noyes, 
"but it seems to me that no American has been 
able to make his aspirations realities as did he." 

"Beyond all possibility of reasonable contro- 
versy," rules ex-United States Senator Albert J. 

27 



^\)t ^vtatt^t American 

Beveridge of Indiana, "the greatest man this 
country has produced and, as I think, the greatest 
the world has produced — excepting, of course, 
Jesus Christ — is George Washington." Ex-Sena- 
tor Beveridge's opinion is particularly pertinent 
because he is fresh from an exhaustive study of 
American history incidental to his recent produc- 
tion of a marvelously valuable portrayal of the 
life and services of John Marshall. " Our history," 
says Beveridge, "shows that the American people 
are fecund in the production of leaders; but this 
is not a steady, continuous phenomenon. On the 
contrary, our production of great leaders has gone 
by periods — ^by waves, as it were. It is not true 
that there are as great men at all times as there 
are at particular times. This subject, like every- 
thing else, seems to be controlled by the rhythmic 
theory of the universe. There are distinct periods 
when leadership sinks appallingly; while at other 
periods super-eminent men appear among us." 

Congressman Frederick H. Gillett of Massa- 
chusetts, Speaker of the House of Representatives, 
joins in declaring Washington the greatest Ameri- 
can: and ex-Speaker Champ Clark of Missouri 
goes further to declare Washington "the greatest 
man that ever lived." 

28 



tS^f^c ^ttattit American 

Colonel F. W. Galbraith of Cincinnati, at present 
National Commander of The American Legion, 
contents himself with one single word — ' * Washing- 
ton" — when interrogated upon this interesting 
subject. But one word alone, in such circum- 
stances, is eloquent. For modem Americans who 
rate Washington first upon the nation's scrolls of 
fame, the whole story was summed in the phrase 
through which the Senate communicated its grief 
to President Adams when the news of Washing- 
ton's death broke upon the Capitol. "On this 
occasion it is manly to weep. Our country mourns 
her Father. The Almighty Disposer of Human 
Events has taken from us our greatest benefactor 
and ornament. Ancient and modern names are 
diminished before him. The destroyers of na- 
tions stood abashed at the majesty of his virtue. 
Let them (his countrymen) teach their children 
never to forget that the fruit of his labors and his 
example are their inheritance." 

Judge Alton B. Parker of New York, Demo- 
cratic nominee for President of the United States 
in 1904, says: "My greatest American is the man 
who was first in the war for independence ; the first 
and only choice for the Presidency of the Conven- 
tion which formulated the Constitution; and the 

29 



Cfje (Creates;! American 

first choice of all the people for President of the 
United States. Without his great leadership in 
the war, our independence might not have been 
gained; without his steadying influence, the Con- 
vention might not have agreed upon the form of 
the Constitution; and without his stabilizing au- 
thority, as President of the United States for two 
terms, the Constitution might have foundered 
upon the political rocks which menaced it." 

Mr. James M. Beck, distinguished lawyer and 
publicist of New York, first pays tribute to Ben- 
jamin Franklin's tremendous intellectuality, then 
adds: "Greatness, however, consists of something 
more than mere intellectual attainments. In 
measuring the relative greatness of men, we must 
have regard to the intellectual, the physical and 
the spiritual elements in human character. So 
considered, it seems to me that George Washing- 
ton is incomparably the greatest of all Americans, 
and this judgment seems confirmed by that which 
someone finely called, 'the arduous greatness of 
things done.'" 

Dr. Lyon G. Tyler of Virginia, President Emeri- 
tus of William and Mary College, is particularly 
vehement in his views related to this concern. ' * It 
surprises me beyond anything," he says, "that you 

30 



should think it necessary to put such a question as 
who is entitled to be called 'the greatest American,' 
or that there should be any hesitation on the part 
of any person in awarding this distinction. The 
idea of any name disputing with George Washing- 
ton the honor of this distinction passes my compre- 
hension. Without him, this country as a nation 
would never have had any existence. It was 
entirely due to his immense moral force that the 
States were kept together during the Revolution 
and the war brought to a successful conclusion; and 
it was largely due to him that the two jarring na- 
tions of the North and South did not separate 
immediately after it. What he accomplished by 
his magnificent moral power was only accom- 
plished in 1 86 1 in much inferior hands by brute 
force. Never did a figure so noble and so grand 
stand at the threshold of any nation ! Pure in his 
private character, unselfish in his patriotism, 
supreme in his moral strength, majestic in his 
personal appearance, he stands without any pos- 
sible rival the greatest American, if not the greatest 
man of all ages." 

Honorable Robert Lansing, ex-Secretary of 
State in the Cabinet of President Wilson, declares 
that "considering all things, character, service 

31 



^Jje (§reategt American 

and accomplishment, George Washington is the 
greatest American in our history." United States 
Senator Selden P. Spencer of Missouri echoes this 
same reverential sentiment; similarly, ex-United 
States Senator George E. Chamberlain of Oregon. 

Mr. Victor F. Lawson, publisher of the Chicago 
Daily News, confronting this hypothetical question, 
lists Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt. "Each 
was the greatest in his respective period," observes 
Mr. Lawson. "Of the three — ^Washington first." 

United States Senator John Sharp Williams of 
Mississippi, a congressional veteran and the au- 
thor of an illuminating work discussing The Per- 
manent Influence of Thomas Jefferson on American 
Institutions, declares that Jefferson was ' ' the most 
far-seeing intellect" in the story of the nation, but 
that Washington "was the greatest man." Mr. 
Clark Howell, Editor of the Atlanta Constitution, 
Atlanta, Georgia, a representative southern journa- 
list, bespeaks this same pre-eminence for Wash- 
ington which seems so generally and so profoimdly 
prevalent in this area. 

United States Senator Oscar W. Underwood of 
Alabama says that from his viewpoint there can 
be but one answer to the question; and adds: "I 
do not say this because for a century it has been 

32 



®l)e i^reategt American 

customary to refer to our first President as the 
foremost man in American history." Says Sena- 
tor Underwood: "George Washington was not 
the greatest statesman, nor the greatest orator, 
nor the greatest general in all American history, 
but as a man ready to make every personal sacri- 
fice for his coimtry, always putting American 
freedom above personal consideration, coimting 
no personal sacrifice too great, for the great re- 
sponsibilities that rested upon him, regarding him 
just as a man, in my judgment he stands foremost 
among all Americans. Then, looking at the 
question from the standpoint of accomplished 
fact, for eight years he held together a ragged 
army, without money, without supplies, and often 
without arms. His character, his perseverance 
and his generalship achieved American independ- 
ence. Then, his patience, common sense and good 
judgment enabled him to reconcile discordant 
elements, removing the conflicts that stood in the 
way of national life in the new States, and molded 
them together under the Constitution, planting 
the seed that was to create the life of the world's 
greatest nation. In my judgment, George Wash- 
ington stands without rival as our greatest 
American." 

^ 33 



Vt'iit (Creates!! ^mtvitan 

Governor William C. Sproul of Pennsylvania 
contributes the opinion that Washington stands 
pre-eminent as the greatest American. "His forti- 
tude, his wisdom and his character made a wonder- 
ful combination, and things which he did, it seems 
to me, 'made other Americans possible.'" 

President Walter Dill Scott of Northwestern 
University, Illinois, puts Washington at the head 
of his favor; but adds, of course correctly, that 
there is no adequate standard of measurement at 
the present time. 

Lyman J. Gage of San Diego, California, the 
clear-eyed and keen-minded octogenarian who 
served with distinction as Secretary of the Treas- 
ury in the Cabinets of Presidents McKinley and 
Roosevelt, rates Washington as the greatest 
American. ' ' Without him, ' ' observes Gage, ' ' there 
might not have been an America. He was an 
aristocrat by instinct and environment, but a 
great democratic patriot by practice and by the 
immortal achievements of a singularly pure and 
exalted career." Mr. Gage pays stiirdy incidental 
tribute, however, in his estimate, to the memory of 
Alexander Hamilton, as is natural in the case of a 
man who has served the Treasury Department as 
did he. "The success of Washington's actual 

34 



^te (^reateist J^metican 

administration as first President of the United 
States hung largely upon the Treasury," Gage 
declares, "and the genius of Hamilton, who 
founded the Treasury and the public credit of the 
United States, is not to be ignored in assessing 
credits to those who fimctioned at the govern- 
ment's birth." 

Another prominent Westerner, President Henry 
Suzzallo of the University of Washington in 
Seattle, nominates Washington. " His character 
and personality unite more of the qualities which 
characterize the American soul than those pos- 
sessed by others," declares this educator. "His 
policies incorporate more the principles which 
are fundamental to our society and government 
than the policies of any other great American 
leaders." 

" I do not think there is any doubt, when every- 
thing is considered, that the world regards George 
Washington as the greatest man in history," says 
ex-Secretary of the Navy Josephus Daniels of 
North Carolina. "Of course, there were other 
men who in any one line of endeavor or in any 
particular intellectual achievement surpassed him. 
Jefferson far surpassed him in conception of popu- 
lar government, and many others in the lines to 

35 



W'^t (^reatesit American 

which they devoted themselves. But in poise, in 
breadth, in welding together the different elements 
which worked together to establish the Republic 
and guide it safely through the stormy seas of its 
early voyage and give it impetus and permanence 
and stabihty and greatness, Washington's name 
leads all the rest." 

Ex-Secretary of War Newton D. Baker of Ohio 
joins his former colleague in the Wilson Cabinet 
in naming Washington the greatest American. 

Franklin D. Roosevelt, Assistant Secretary of 
the Navy throughout the World War and Demo- 
cratic candidate for Vice-President in 1920, bases 
his estimate upon a consideration of epochs. 
"After considerable thought," says he, "I have 
eliminated the names of all who belong in what 
might be called the modern period on the groimd 
that the history of themselves and their period can- 
not yet be considered final. This would eliminate 
the great names from 1850 on. In the prior period 
it seems to me that the name of Washington must, 
all things considered, be given first place." 

Ex-Secretary of the Treasury Leslie M. Shaw, 
formerly of Iowa and now of Washington, interest- 
ingly says: "Assuming that the difference between 
a big man and a little man is that the former does 

36 



tKIje ^reategt iHmcrican 

not make a fool of himself all of the time, and that 
great men should be graded in inverse ratio to the 
frequency in which they limp, I am compelled to 
nominate Washington as the greatest American. 
As between him and Lincoln, it is hard to distin- 
guish. Perhaps distance has eliminated errors 
and left visible only the mountain peaks of 
I greatness in each of these." 

President Edwin A. Alderman of the Univer- 

»sity of Virginia nominates George Washington. 
"Character is greater than genius," he argues, 
"and, by the sheer moral grandeur of his character, 
Washington achieved a place among the supreme 
f figures in the annals of our race. He is a great 
illuminating allegory, in fact, of unselfishness, vast 
common sense, correct vision of a justly ordered 
modern state, patience, self-control and integrity. 
He has become the apostle to all later ages of the 
high doctrine that immortal fame and immeasur- 
able service may be rendered to mankind more 
enduringly by integrity and the quiet virtues than 
by superhuman gifts. If I were asked, I may add, 
to name the most beautiful, the most appealing, 
the most flawless character in our life, combining 
in a noble symmetry strength and virtue, I should 
name another Virginian, Robert E. Lee." 

37 



Cfje (^reatesit American 

Ex-United States Senator John W. Weeks of 
Massachusetts argues that "if it had not been for 
George Washington we might not have achieved 
our independence at the time we did and perhaps 
never as completely as resulted from the Revolu- 
tion. If it had not been for his soimd judgment, 
we probably could not have organized the form of 
government which has been so beneficial to us and 
the whole world ; and, while he was not in any sense 
a brilliant man, he was able to steer the coimtry 
clear of all shoals during its formative period, and 
for that reason, in my opinion, he is entitled to be 
placed first among American citizens." 

Cleveland H. Dodge of New York, representa- 
tive of the largely successful business men of 
America and prominent likewise in philanthropic 
and educational works, says: "I think the verdict 
of history, and the general consensus of the best 
opinion of the American people, are correct in 
feeling that the greatest American was George 
Washington." 

United States Senator James A. Reed of Mis- 
souri declares that Washington was the greatest 
American, although Jefferson was "a close second." 
"In the first instance," argues Reed, "it was 
Washington's wonderful organizing ability and 

38 



tK^Jje (^reatesit American 

sublime courage and patience which gained our 
liberties. He then furnished two splendid ex- 
amples. He immediately surrendered his military 
authority and afterwards declined to be a candi- 
date for a third term as President. Upon the 
other hand, Jefferson's mind undoubtedly best 
conceived the structure of a Democratic govern- 
ment. His marvelous ability in foreseeing the 
dangers lying in the future and in guarding against 
them entitles him to a place as the best construc- 
tive statesman of history. But I think, all in all, 
we owe the most to Washington." 

Mr. Frank I. Cobb of the New York World, one 
of America's leading contemporary jotirnalists, 
pleads the difficulty of deciding who is the greatest 
American "because men must be judged by their 
periods. Inasmuch as it was Washington who 
guided the coimtry though the Revolution and put 
the Republic on its feet, I am disposed to believe 
that the title belongs to him more than to any other 
man. But, of course, Jefferson was the great 
American of the period that followed. In a way, 
John Marshall could be called the great American 
of the post- Jeff ersoni an period, and Lincoln, of 
course, is the great American of the latter half of 
the nineteenth century. Nor do I think there is 

39 



tIDJje ^vtateit American 

any doubt that history will rank Wilson as the 
greatest American of the twentieth century." 

President Walter E. Clark of the University of 
Nevada, at Reno, declares the dual pre-eminence 
of Washington and Lincoln. "Choice between 
them," says he, "is for me very difficult. Wash- 
ington served Virginia conspicuously for over 
twenty years before 1 774 and from that date he was 
the most conspicuous servant of all the colonies 
for twenty-five years. He was notable as a field 
commander and as commander-in-chief of all the 
armies; as a counsellor in the sixteen years con- 
sultation prior to the launching of the United States 
of America; as the first President during eight 
stressful and dangerous initial years and as the 
yoimg Republic's grand old man during the re- 
maining three years of his life. Lincoln was a 
miracle man — a greater thinker, a more convincing 
debater, a far greater master of English, and withal 
gentler, more sjTupathetic, more human than 
Washington, Lincoln served a far more complex 
day. His problems were massed. On the other 
hand, his direct public service period was very 
brief, compared to that of Washington. Wash- 
ington was a beginner of great things — served 
notably with initiative of wisest type in a day with- 

40 



^fje (^reatejft i^merkan 

out precedents; Lincoln was rather a preserver. 
I am loath to nominate either of these two pre- 
eminent Americans for first place. The service 
to our nation of each was indispensably great. If, 
however, I must rank them, I shall name Wash- 
ington as first and Lincoln second only to the 
greatest of all Americans." 

Interesting testimony is now produced exter- 
nally. I asked Mario G. Menocal, President of 
the Republic of Cuba and a man whose education 
in the States makes him peculiarly familiar with 
our history and traditions, to name the greatest 
American from his detached point of view. "It 
is hard to say who among so many illustrious Ameri- 
cans famous in the history of their coimtry is 
greatest," declares Menocal. "Without failing to 
recognize the superior qualities which other histori- 
cal personages may possess, from certain de- 
termined points of view, there is one whose name 
inspires admiration and respect and who appears 
prominently among the many historical celebrities 
of America. I refer to George Washington, the 
guiding spirit of your great nation, and who, as 
you know, was first in peace, first in war, and 
first in the hearts of his countrymen, as he is always 
proclaimed by the American people." 

41 



Efje (§reate£(t American 

Lord James Bryce of England, long the British 
Ambassador to the United States and one of the 
most discerning analysts and historians who ever 
studied and discussed American institutions, is 
another formidable external witness. "I will 
make answer in a way which may be thought 
obvious but which represents a judgment long ago 
formed," said Lord Bryce in answer to this book's 
interrogation. "George Washington is, take him 
all in all, the greatest figure in American history." 

If the quinquennial balloting for eligibility for 
New York University's "Hall of Fame" is a 
criterion — and really it amounts to an anonymous 
S3miposium of the opinions of leaders in contempo- 
rary American public thought quite similar to that 
which this section of this book reports — Washing- 
ton leads by narrow margin as the greatest Ameri- 
can. The largest number of votes for place in the 
Hall of Fame ever returned for any American was 
given Washington in the initial referendum. He 
was closely followed by Lincoln, Webster, Franklin, 
Jefferson and Marshall. Alexander Hamilton did 
not become eligible for the Hall of Fame imder its 
rules until 19 lo, because of his birth in the West 
Indies. In the 19 10 referendiim he led all other 
Americans for recognition. 

42 



(0tfjers 



Many prominent citizens have told me that the 
elevation of any one American to super-eminence 
is impossible. Thus President Harry Pratt Judson 
of the University of Chicago insists that an intelli- 
gent answer to this question is impossible: first, 
because greatness is a relative matter; second, be- 
cause it applies to lines of life of a great variety. 
I confess that this is largely true as a problem in 
literal construction. President W. H. P. Faunce 
of Brown University, Rhode Island, similarly in- 
sists that too much depends upon the definition 
of ' ' greatness. ' ' " It is somewhat like asking which 
is the most beautiful flower or which the best 
country to live in; I do not think an answer 
is possible," declares President Faunce. Rear 
Admiral William S. Sims similarly protests that 
"intelligent answer" is impossible for the reason 
that greatness comprises so many different quali- 
ties. President Stratton D. Brooks of Oklahoma 
University says that "there is no man entitled to 

43 



^f}t <^reate£it American 

be called the greatest American." Ex-President 
William Howard Taft insists that an opinion is 
impossible, "first, because it is a question of defini- 
tion upon which there is a great difference, and, 
second, because there might be difference as to the 
facts, and, on the whole, as to the merits." Presi- 
dent Arthur T. Hadley of Yale University says that 
"no one man stands out so pre-eminently above 
all others that I should venture to select him as the 
greatest American." George B. Cortelyou of New 
York, whose long public work comprehends closest 
relationships with three Presidents, Cleveland, 
McKinley and Roosevelt, takes this same view, 
insisting that "there is no common basis of com- 
parison." So, too, E. W. Scripps of California, 
connected with twenty-two great American news- 
papers and utterly keen in his perceptions, insists 
that there is no greatest American. He argues 
that our national achievements are a composite 
product to which the most radically opposite men 
and views may have made a common contribu- 
tion. Thus he maintains that the evolution of our 
institutions required the clash between Hamil- 
tonianism and Jeffersonianism in order to chal- 
lenge the best advantage from each — one a foil 
for the other — both equally essential. For all of 

44 



^\)t (Greatest ilmerican 

these conservative judgments there can be easy- 
vindication. 

On the other hand, many prominent citizens are 
content to bracket their first favorites and let a 
plural answer bespeak their beliefs that there is 
no one greatest American. Thus Vice-President 
Calvin Coolidge rests his imdivided verdict between 
Washington and Lincoln. 

Major General Leonard Wood, contending that 
"various men have done great work in different 
fields of activity," crowns a trinity of great 
Americans — Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt. 

Dr. Henry Van Dyke, eminent editor, author, 
scholar, diplomat and theologian of Princeton, says: 
"If you mean to ask who was the greatest man 
among great Americans, my answer would be 
Washington; if you mean to ask who was the 
most distinctively American man among great 
Americans, my answer would be Lincoln." 

Professor James Ford Rhodes, one of the keenest 
and most profound historical authorities in the 
land, nominates both Washington and Lincoln 
and says: "It has always been impossible for me to 
give either one the precedence. We used to say, 
George Washington, the Creator of the Nation, 
Abraham Lincoln, its Preserver. Popular fa- 

45 



^f)t ^xtatt^t ^tnttitan 

vorites in time of political or other excitement have 
been 'Washington, Lincoln and Garfield,' or 
'Washington, Lincoln and Cleveland,' or 'Wash- 
ington, Lincoln and Roosevelt,' or 'Washington, 
Lincoln and Wilson.' The popular voice has 
always been for the first two names; it changes 
only for the third." 

Stewart Edward White, the famous American 
novelist, follows one of the foregoing formulas and 
rejects another. "I cannot answer your ques- 
tion," White replies. "I think our country has 
passed through several fundamental crises, in each 
of which a man has filled the bill so completely 
that he might be considered as indispensable. 
Washington took care that we came into being; 
and without his ability and tenacity, I do not 
believe we would have gained independence. 
Equally there is no doubt in my mind that 
Lincoln held us from an otherwise inevitable dis- 
ruption. Likewise, Roosevelt prevented our com- 
plete descent into the sordidness of a materialism 
that would have been fatal to all our ideals. I can, 
however, be definite in one respect. I do not 
include Mr. Wilson." 

General Charles H. Taylor, famous editor of the 
Boston Globe, drops into a colloquialism to observe 

46 



Cf)e <^reate£(t American 

that Washington and Lincoln "fill the bill fifty- 
fifty." 

Federal Judge Kenesaw M. Landis of Illinois 
frankly confesses that between Washington, 
Franklin and Lincoln, he cannot choose the greatest 
American. 

United States Senator William E. Borah de- 
clares his inability to determine a preference as 
between Washington and Lincoln. "If I should 
give you the name of either," says Senator Borah, 
"I would likely regret it afterwards, as I have 
been really unable to determine in my own mind 
which one, if either, is entitled to be classed as the 
greatest American. When I think of the stupen- 
dous work of Washington in creating a Republic — 
the first real Republic that ever existed — I am 
impressed with the fact that he should have 
supreme title. But when I reflect again upon the 
supreme task of Lincoln in preserving that same 
Republic, imder conditions which never before 
confronted a leader, I feel that he should have the 
honor. So I am going to leave it there. I cannot 
do otherwise and be candid." Of Lincoln, Sena- 
tor Borah has said: "There was in him a fullness, 
a completeness, a greatness, which seem to forbid 
an attempt to accentuate particular qualities. 

47 



tzrije (^leatcgt American 

In the consideration of partictilar elements of 
strength we are soon lost in the contemplation of 
his massive figure as a whole. His life in all its 
wretchedness and glory, in all its penury and 
power, intrudes itself upon us and seems as inex- 
plicable and incomprehensible as the cunning of 
Angelo's chisel or the touch of Titian's brush. 
Sacred writers, had he lived in those days, would 
have placed him among their seers and prophets 
and invested him with the hidden powers of the 
mystic world. Antiquity would have clothed 
such a being with the attributes of deity. He was 
one of the mortal and intellectual giants of the 
earth! "^ On the other hand. Senator Borah has 
said of Washington: "What is the test of states- 
manship? Is it the formation of theories, the 
utterance of abstract and incontrovertible truths, 
or is it the capacity and the power to give to a 
people that concrete thing called liberty, that vital 
and indispensable thing in human happiness called 
free institutions and to establish over all and 
above all the blessed and eternal reign of order and 
law? If this be the test, where shall we find an- 
other whose name is entitled to be written be- 

* Address delivered at Lincoln's birthplace, November 

48 



tlTfje (^reatesit iSmerican 

side the name of Washington? . . . He led the 
Revolutionary Army to victory. He was the very 
first to suggest a Union instead of a Confederacy. 
He presided over and coimseled with great wisdom 
the convention which framed the Constitution. 
He guided the government through its first peril- 
ous years. He gave dignity and stability and 
honor to that which was looked upon by the world 
as a passing experiment, and finally, as his own 
peculiar and particular contribution to the hap- 
piness of his countrymen and to the cause of 
the Republic, he gave us his great foreign policy 
under which we have lived and prospered and 
strengthened for nearly a century and a half.'" 

Honorable Samuel M. McCall of Boston, long 
distinguished both as an able statesman and as a 
profound scholar, declares hesitancy to pick the 
greatest American for many men have appar- 
ently been indispensable to the greatness and even 
the existence of the country. ''We have had 
some very rich elements of manhood from the 
beginning," observes Mr. McCall, "some of them 
probably whose names are inconspicuous if known 
at all. There has been more than one 'mute and 
inglorious Milton' or 'Cromwell guiltless of his 

* Address in the Senate, November 19, 1919. 

4 49 



country's blood.' Without Franklin we might 
never have got the French Alliance. Without 
Washington we might never have won the war. 
Without Hamilton we might never have got the 
Constitution made workable. Without Webster 
the sentiment of nationality might not have been 
built up at the critical time and become strong 
enough to win in the inevitable conflict ; and with- 
out Lincoln that conflict might not have been won. 
So I hesitate to say who is the greatest American." 
So, too, Milton A. McRae of Detroit, Michigan, 
and San Diego, California, long one of the most 
prominent figures in dynamic American journalism, 
insists that "there are so many great Americans, 
it would be impossible to designate the great- 
est." Observing that in any event an opinion is 
not a proved fact, Mr. McRae says that "while 
Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt were pre- 
eminent leaders in America, there were many 
other great Americans." However, Mr. McRae 
sturdily endorses the fundamental purpose of this 
symposium as set down in the preface, namely, to 
stimulate interest in American history. "The 
present generation," he rightly declares, "is so en- 
grossed in the material things of life that it is lament- 
ably poor in the knowledge of American history 

50 



^'i)t ^reatcjst l^mcrican 

which should furnish the richest and choicest food 
for thought and for human progress. Our history 
proves beyond all doubt that America is the 
greatest star in the constellation of nations." 

Though many of these able thinkers either hesi- 
tate to make a definite choice between established 
popular idols or refuse to imdertake any dissec- 
tion at all, others step outside the two prime popu- 
lar favorites for supreme eminence and cast their 
favor elsewhere. 

Extremely interesting among this latter class is 
former Vice-President Thomas R. Marshall of 
Indiana. Confronted with the inquiry which is 
the subject of this study, Marshall says: 

"This is a question that can only be answered 
from the viewpoint of the man who makes the 
reply. Eliminating the relations of the Republic 
to World politics and constricting the answer 
exclusively to the effect upon American internal 
affairs, I find myself, not only from my reading 
upon the subject, but also from my personal recol- 
lection, strangely tossed between two opinions of 
two men whom I conceive to have been very great 
Americans and neither one of them would perhaps 
be selected by any other man who had not felt the 
urge and touch for national unity and national 

5.1 



peace. When I consider the situation of the 
Republic at the beginning of 1861, knowing the 
personal following which Stephen A. Douglas had 
and believing that had he spoken for the South or 
kept silent, Ohio, Indiana and Illinois would have 
been the storm center of secession, I am inclined 
to think that the influence which he exercised by his 
great address at Chicago, calling upon all men who 
believed in him to stand by the Union, stamps 
him as the man who had the most potent influence 
in preserving the American Republic from disin- 
tegration and, therefore, entitles him to the dis- 
tinction of The Greatest American. On the other 
hand, when I come down to 1876 and realize the 
fateful moments when the electoral commission 
decided against the claims of Samuel J. Tilden, 
with personal knowledge upon my part that had 
Tilden asked us to we would have grabbed our 
gims, gone to Washington and endeavored to seat 
him regardless of the result to the peace of the 
Republic, I am inclined to think that his ready 
acquiescence in what I have always believed to be 
the unjust decision of the commission stamps him 
as a man who loved his country more than he loved 
his own personal preferment. But in reality, 
The Greatest American, from my standpoint, is 

52 



ttfje ^xtattit iSmerican 

multitudinous in number. He is the plain, every- 
day, unassuming, God-fearing, law-obeying man, 
who cheerfully yields to constituted power all of 
his preconceived notions, to the end that neither 
treason, secession nor riot may stain in the eyes 
of other nations the flag so many of us love so 
well." 

Pursuing this beautiful, final thought of the 
former Vice-President's a bit farther, it might be 
eloquently maintained from this viewpoint that 
every soldier in every war America has ever 
been forced to fight — certainly everyone of the 
total of 462,562 casualties (figures furnished by 
Adjutant General Harris, November 15, 1919), 
which the Republic has cost — is entitled, each in- 
dividually for himself, to be decorated as The 
Greatest American. Dr. David Jayne Hill, emi- 
nent educator and diplomat, now at Washington, 
testifies in much this same vein. "I doubt if 
anyone can answer your question with precision 
and perfect justice," he declares to me. "The 
standard of measurement is not intellect, apparent 
service which have many motives or opportunity. 
I believe these have been possessed in equal degree 
by thousands of Americans, many of whom we 
have never heard of. Some of them perished at 

53 



Valley Forge, others on the fields of Flanders, 
others in the Atlantic. There is no aristocracy of 
Americanism. We all know the names of many of 
its exemplars, but I am sure whoever is the great- 
est of them would not like being considered the 
greatest." 

Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United 
States and credited by some authorities as "the 
most conspicuous apostle of Democracy in 
America'" is nominated as the greatest American 
by ex-Governor James M. Cox of Ohio, Democratic 
candidate for President in the elections of 1920. 
Jefferson unquestionably was a towering figure in 
his time and made many notable contributions to 
the history of his country. He was an ardent 
patriot in the days when the spirit of the Revolu- 
tion was crystallizing and had a large responsi- 
bility, in a committee upon which he served with 
Franklin, Adams, Sherman and Livingston, for 
the text of the Declaration of Independence, the 
most famous charter of liberty in the history of the 
world. After honorable service as Ambassador to 
France, Jefferson sat in Washington's first Cabi- 
net as Secretary of State. He was a strong be- 
liever in State sovereignty and decentralization of 

^ Encyclopedia Britannica. 

54 



public authority — the antithesis of Hamilton. 
His conflicts with Hamilton upon these scores 
manifestly prejudice his standing in the eyes of any 
historical juror who finds first eminence for Jeffer- 
son's persistent historical foe. He was twice 
elected President and refused to stand for a third 
term though pressed to do so by the legislatures of 
five States. His greatest achievement in states- 
manship was his negotiation of the famous Louisi- 
ana purchase. His greatest impress upon history 
is in the role of exaggerated democracy. It is a 
familiar legend that his dress was "of plain clothe" 
on the day of his inauguration ; and that he rode to 
the Capital on horseback, alone and imattended, 
dismounted without assistance and hitched his 
horse to a fence. This atmosphere he carried to 
the last possible extreme in all his public works 
and private manifestations. He eschewed all 
titles. Even "Mr." was distasteful to him. Cer- 
tainly in these respects he was unique among all 
great Americans. Certainly, too, in many respects 
he was a genius, not the least of these respects 
being his canny sense of political mass-appeal. 
Certainly he was our first great "Commoner" 
in every literal application of that word. But 
that he was the greatest American, Governor Cox 

55 



Cfje i^rcatejft American 

alone in this symposiiini contends, although Jeffer- 
son's name is prominently and honorably men- 
tioned by several others as previously reported. 

"It is not an easy thing to arrive at a decision," 
Cox observes in responding to interrogation. 
"Washington rendered a wonderful service, yet 
he was not the specialized genius that Jefferson was. 
Jackson was a rare combination of common sense, 
rugged integrity and courage. He was made for 
his time, but he was not the great human intelli- 
gence that Jefferson was. Lincoln stands out al- 
most incomparable in history — in fact, he is one of 
the greatest characters in all human history. But 
it must be remembered that the genius of this re- 
public consists in its democracy. Jefferson sensed 
it and phrased it better than anyone in all our his- 
tory. You find the impress of his deep convictions 
on the Declaration of Independence, and other 
works which came from his hands. He was a rare 
genius in questions of government and in establish- 
ing the relation between society and government ; 
also in applying the checks and balances of 
government." 

Professor Charles M. Andrews of Yale's faculty 
and another of the greatest living American his- 
torians, mentions the name of Theodore Roosevelt 

56 



^\)t 0xtattit American 

alone, but with qualifications. "I doubt if this 
question is capable of being answered," says Pro- 
fessor Andrews, "for no one can be named who. is 
The Greatest American. Men are great in certain 
fields and among them it is not possible to select 
any one who deserves to be placed above the others. 
If you are searching for the most typical American, 
however, I am inclined to think that I should name 
Roosevelt, but I should hesitate a long time before 
I called him The Greatest American." 

There is no such reservation, however, in the 
verdict returned by Henry C. Wallace of Des 
Moines, Iowa, one of the nation's leaders in agri- 
cultural joumahsm. "I say without hesitation," 
declares Mr. Wallace, "that in my opinion 
Theodore Roosevelt is best entitled to be called 
The Greatest American, because he exemplified in 
his own life the qualities we value most in an 
American citizen." 

Gifiord Pinchot of Pennsylvania says that 
Washington, Lincoln and Roosevelt are the three 
men among whom The Greatest American must be 
chosen. "I believe," he argues, "that Roosevelt 
could have done everything Washington did and a 
good many things that Washington could not have 
done. That leaves Lincoln and Roosevelt. Be- 

57 



^i)t ^ttattsit jimerican 

tween the two I confess I am in doubt. Roose- 
velt, I think, could not have played the part that 
Lincoln did in humanizing the relations between 
the North and South. Lincoln, I think, as a pure, 
intellectual force did not equal Roosevelt, nor 
could he in my judgment have grasped great 
international problems with the clear definition 
which so remarkably characterized Roosevelt's 
mind in action. My answer must be Lincoln or 
Roosevelt; which, I do not know." 

Roosevelt's credentials find sturdy endorsement 
in the yoimger collegiate mind of the coimtry — if 
a test case may be called typical. Indeed, in this 
respect, he stands second only to Lincoln in num- 
ber of proponents. Professor C. H. Van Tyne, 
head of the History Department of the University 
of Michigan, polled his class in American history 
upon this question with the following interesting 
result: Lincoln, 119; Roosevelt, 57; Wilson, 18; 
Washington, 10; Franklin, 4; Jefferson, i; Edison, 
I ; Marshall, i ; Bryan, i ; Samuel Adams, 2. One 
curious characteristic of this poll lies in the fact 
that only seventeen students out of 214 voting 
cast their decision back of 1 860 upon the calendars 
of history. Does this indicate that, as a nation, 
we are ripening into "age"; that we are now old 

58 



enough to have well-defined eras; and that the 
generations of tomorrow are to feel a remoteness 
from colonial times and the years of the founda- 
tion which flings these earlier periods back into 
vague and musty tradition which is to cease to 
make a living impress upon students of the future? 

That Theodore Roosevelt was a very great 
American, superb in his dynamic genius and in 
his irresistibly progressive power for good, is an 
axiom which requires neither proofs nor eulogy 
for the purposes of this volume because the men 
and women of today are still living in intimate 
memories of the man himself. Americans know 
him out of richly intimate personal associations. 
What the Old World thinks of him may perhaps 
be epitomized by quoting General Robert George 
Nivelle, defender of Verdun, at Roosevelt's grave.' 
"In the name of the French Republic, I offer this 
wreath to the memory of the Great American who 
was the foremost and most steadfast friend of the 
Allies." 

President Henry Louis Smith of Washington 
and Lee University, Virginia, prefaces his analysis 
of the question with the observation that it is diffi- 
cult to define the meaning of the word greatest as 

' January 2, 1921, at Oyster Bay, New York. 

59 



tKfje i^reatesit American 

applied to a citizen. "There is the greatness of 
one's intrinsic character," says President Smith; 
"The greatness due to the circiimstances which 
made him the uppermost figure in some vast move- 
ment not due to his own efforts, and the greatness 
of service to the world, which may also be due to 
circumstances rather than to the leader which the 
circumstances rather than his own ability thrust 
into prominence. I would say that the four 
greatest Americans noted chronologically are 
George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Robert E. 
Lee and Woodrow Wilson. In the purity, sym- 
metry and moral elevation of their intrinsic char- 
acters, I would rate them Lee, Washington, 
Lincoln, Wilson. In their intrinsic ability and 
their service rendered the world, I would probably 
rate them Washington, Wilson, Lincoln, Lee. If 
I rated simply their service to humanity in an hour 
of great and overwhelming crisis, I would say that 
Woodrow Wilson is The Great est American, George 
Washington the second, and Abraham Lincoln the 
third." 

United States Senator George H. Moses of New 
Hampshire nominates Daniel Webster as The 
Greatest American. "Webster's name," argues 
the Senator, "rests not alone upon his great 

60 



tE'\)t Creates;! i^merican 

oratory, which is as imperishable as that of 
Demosthenes, but upon his constructive work as a 
statesman, both legislative and executive, and 
upon the fact that it was he who by his exposition 
of the Constitution made it possible for this 
country to do its work." 

Oscar S. Straus of New York, widely known in 
public works which have included responsibilities 
both as a member of President Roosevelt's cabinet 
and as an Ambassador in America's foreign service, 
offers the unique suggestion that prime favor 
in this quest belongs to "Roger Williams, the 
foimder of Rhode Island, the pioneer of religious 
liberty and the first true type of an American 
freeman." 

Mr. Cyrus H. K. Curtis, eminent American 
publisher, nominates Benjamin Franklin as The 
Greatest American. Possibly the boasted gene- 
alogy of Mr. Curtis' Saturday Evening Post bears 
unconscious influence upon his decision; or per- 
haps his long residence in the city and the State 
upon which Franklin shed such lustre may con- 
tribute to his predilections. The average Penn- 
sylvanian is inevitably loyal to Franklin's memory. 
Franklin, however, cannot be dismissed with 
superficiahties. The truth is that he was superb 

6i 



Wi)t ^vtattit l^merican 

in a multitude of ways; and that no record of 
Great Americans can ever be complete without 
giving him the honored consideration which Mr. 
Curtis' nomination challenges. Self-made and 
self -cultured, he furnished the impulse for un- 
counted useful movements addressed to the com- 
mon weal; and his constructive contributions to 
the emancipation of America lend dignity to any 
other man's achievements with which they may be 
compared. 

Franklin was among the vigorous pioneers in 
militant American journalism. He organized our 
first circulating library. He initiated the move- 
ment which resulted in the foundation of the 
University of Pennsylvania. He organized the 
first police force and fire department in the col- 
onies. He was pre-eminently the greatest natural 
philosopher of his time, the first to demonstrate 
the congenity between electricity and lightning. 
He was the first American Edison. He was an 
accomplished linguist — the unobtrusive scholar 
in superlative degree. He proposed the scheme 
of American Union as early as 1754 when arguing 
measures of colonial defense against prospective 
war with France. He was our first colonial mes- 
senger to England to protest excesses flung upon 

62 



W\)t <§reates!t American 

our forebears. His interviews with Grenville fore- 
cast the American Revolution. By the unsup- 
ported power of intellect and personality he 
secured a repeal of the infamous Stamp Act, though 
this British concession was sterilized by immedi- 
ately subsequent repetition of exploitation in new 
directions. He sat in the Continental Congress 
which commissioned George Washington to his 
immortal tasks. He was the first colonial post- 
master-general. He was a member of the Com- 
mittee of Five which drew up the Declaration of 
Independence. He was one of three Commis- 
sioners to visit the Court of Louis XVI where, by 
the greatest feats in all the history of fruitful 
diplomacy, he captivated French imagination and 
French love and was largely responsible for win- 
ning continuous French support which gave the 
Colonies their greatest boon. He was one of the 
Commissioners to execute the final British peace. 
He was an influential and ingenious member of 
the Constitutional Convention. He organized and 
was the original President of the first society ever 
formed in America to advocate the abolition of 
slavery and penned the first protest on this sub- 
ject ever addressed to Congress. No mere para- 
graph can do justice to his superlative attainments. 

63 



^tie (Greatest American 

His fame was as wide as the civilized world when 
he died in the ripeness of eighty-five beneficent 
years; and posterity has multiplied his honors. 
No American is better entitled to a place in such a 
symposium as this work presents. Suffice it to 
say, in a word, that any man who deserves to 
supersede him as "The Greatest American" must 
indeed be very great. 

Franklin has been highly mentioned in preceding 
chapters by gentlemen who finally give their first 
favor elsewhere. But the judgment of Mr. Curtis 
is directly endorsed by the president of a prominent 
Southern imiversity who says — "taking every- 
thing into consideration I believe that Benjamin 
Franklin is The Greatest American" — and adds a 
request that he be not directly quoted by name 
"because I am aware that this judgment will seem 
singular to many of my friends from the South." 



64 



PART TWO 



65 




The Hamilton Coat-of-Arms 



ilamilton 

Sntrobuctron 

What man in the whole story of the nation 
down to date, is best entitled, all things considered, 
to be called "The Greatest American"? 

The preceding symposium reflects a profound 
trend of seasoned opinion in two well-defined direc- 
tions. But the very difference of opinion existing 
between these two schools — the Lincolnian and 
the Washingtonian — proves the propriety of free 
thought on the subject and justifies the extension 
of that freedom into a wider selection. 

Citizens who make bold to disagree with these 
major trends must be acquitted of any lack of 
reverence and affection for the two great Ameri- 
cans who so largely monopolize first favor. There 
is utterly no element of disrespect for the mirific 
inheritances left us in the lives of The Father and 
The Saviour of their country, in opinions which 
turn elsewhere with their paramount acknowl- 

67 



^J)e (^reatesit American 

edgments. The act of nominating some other 
"Greatest American" is no more an heresy than 
the act of refusing to nominate any one at all. We 
have been blessed with a wealth of great Ameri- 
cans. For all of them, modern generations and 
their posterity must always be prodigal with 
gratitude. The marvel is that there should be an}?- 
concentrated verdict at all in such a calendar and 
such a story. That a minority should stress the 
claims upon pre-eminence of other great Americans 
is fundamentally a compliment to the fecundity of 
American genius. From still another viewpoint, 
it but emphasizes the tremendous power and glory 
of Washington and Lincoln by demonstrating the 
historical competition that has had to be overcome 
before these first favorites of the majority could 
reach their pinnacles in the perspective of the 
modern day. 

I join this minority, with its Franklin and its 
Jefferson, its Stephens and its Tilden, its Wil- 
liams and its Webster, its Roosevelt and its Wilson ; 
but I join it to challenge the attention of America 
to the First Friend of her youth, the man who 
made a more diversified contribution of indis- 
pensable services to the American Republic than 
any other patriot before or since. I join it to 

68 



^ht (Greatest American 

nominate the Master Builder of indissoluble Union, 
the Gladiator who saved the Constitution, the 
Founder of American Public Credit, the Architect 
of Policies and Institutions, the inspired Oracle of 
sotmd American Purpose and Necessity, the In- 
trepid Soldier, the Great Economist, the Most 
Brilliant Author, the most Fascinating Orator 
and the Most Formidable Legal Luminary of his 
time. I join this minority to nominate the in- 
dubitable genius whom a forgetful posterity all but 
ignores in its casual calculations, yet to whom 
it owes so great a debt that neither marbles 
nor granites nor eulogies could begin to strike 
a balance. I join it to nominate Alexander 
Hamilton as the man who, all things considered, 
is entitled to be called "The Greatest Ameri- 
can": and, to this end, I beg leave to submit my 
proofs. 

In my canvass of the nation's thought, reported 
heretofore, I interviewed Hamilton's two greatest 
living biographers. When confronted with my 
question, shorn of any inkling as to my interroga- 
tion's purpose, Gertrude Atherton promptly de- 
clared that Hamilton is entitled to the pre-eminence 
which this volume undertakes to establish. She 
could not have sensed the compelling drama of his 

69 



®lje Greatest l^metrican 

life as beautifully and as eloquently as she has 
done without leaving this reflex upon her soul. 
Thus does woman's intuition once more vindicate 
itself. Senator Lodge declared that there is no 
"Greatest American." However, he pronounced 
Hamilton "the greatest constructive states- 
man" in the story of the world — and such an 
estimate from such high source is an extreme in 
compliment. 

Just one citizen, in the wider field of the nation 
at large, came to the symposium with the name of 
Hamilton upon his lips as the exclusive answer to 
my question. This man was Myron T. Herrick, 
ex-Governor of Ohio and Ambassador to France. 
Says Herrick : 

"Washington, of course, stands as the Father of 
his country. But his great accomplishments were 
possible largely through the constructive ability 
of Alexander Hamilton. The conception of repre- 
sentative government presented by Hamilton was 
the frame-work of the Republic. The victories 
won by Washington could not have been perpetu- 
ated in the Republic but for the, at the time, 
unparalleled genius of Hamilton. Then again, 
the form of government as framed by Hamilton 
could not have been 'carried through* but for 

70 



tluiic (Greatest American 

the genius of John Marshall whose decisions made 
the Constitution. But for the strength of such 
men, men of great ability — like Jefferson — would 
have destroyed that government in their partisan 
zeal and lack of comprehension. Then another 
crisis came, and the nation was unquestionably 
saved from division and the Republic perpetuated 
by Abraham Lincoln. I think it is almost impos- 
sible to select one man and say that he is the genius 
— The Greatest American — because it was the 
combination of these men of genius, who laid aside 
all self-interest for the purpose of creating a 
Nation. But glancing back over this galaxy, 
possibly the first man who occurs to me, responsi- 
ble more than anyone else for the greatness of our 
Nation, is the man with the great creative genius — 
Alexander Hamilton." 

Some others have included Hamilton on their 
incidental rolls. But so far as this symposiimi has 
gone, he is conspicuous chiefly by his absence. This 
but emphasizes our tragic historical forgetfulness, 
as a race; it but corroborates my foreword's charge 
that we owe Hamilton's memory an unrequited 
debt; and it but whets the zeal for exhibits, argu- 
ments and conclusions to justify the basis of this 
challenge. 

71 



t^lje <^reate0t ilmerican 

"Persons in great stations," said Addison, "have 
seldom their true character drawn till several 
years after their death. Their personal friendships 
and enmities must cease, and the parties they were 
engaged in be at an end, before their faults or their 
virtues can have justice done them. When writers 
have the least opportunities of knowing the truth, 
they are in the best disposition to tell it." It will 
be a happy benediction on this work, if an approxi- 
mation of Addison's verdict may be its final due. 
There is nothing new in it save viewpoint and 
analysis. It does not pretend the ambitious effort 
of a closely detailed biography. It does, however, 
purpose to illuminate the picture in a new set ing 
and adorn it with a novel frame ; and it does provide 
an authenticated epitome of America's obligation to 
this super-genius. To measure this obligation is 
to come closely into contact with the whole story 
of the American foimdation. To know Hamilton 
is to know the history of the creation of the United 
States. I have imdertaken to discuss him in rela- 
tion to his major contributions to this history, and, 
finally, I have summed up the whole laureation in 
behalf of his exalted memory. Hamiltonism is to 
Americanism what sterling is to silver. For my 
craftsmanship I beg indulgence; for my subject I 

72 



crave the perpetuated veneration and intimate 
affection which any nation, worthy its inheritance, 
should unfaiHngly preserve in relation to its highest 
benefactors. 

The Author. 



73 



Jf rom Jiirtf) to ©eatfj 

A QUICK comprehension of Alexander Hamil- 
ton's epitomized life story is the necessary source 
of such an analysis as shall now be undertaken. In 
briefest form the chronology is here set down. In 
all of the great crises which his fertile genius served, 
detailed study is reserved to subsequent chapters 
wherein his dissected functions are compiled. In 
other words, this preliminary sketch does nothing 
more than erect the unadorned framework of a 
towering career. The completed structure may 
be visioned only through the final, composite pic- 
ture which embraces all the superlative handiwork 
which this master artisan wrought into his life and 
times. We build , here the mere calendar. Its 
illttmination is a later task. This is the program, 
scheduling the drama's scenes and acts down to its 
tragic epilogue. Like all programs, it is but a 
preface. The play's the thing! 

Alexander Hamilton was bom on the Island of 
Nevis in the West Indies, January 1 1 , 1 757. Under 

74 







^ S 



w 



lU g 



British allegiance, in the heart of the tropics, with 
an inheritance of pure Scotch blood from his father 
and sturdy French Huguenot from his gifted 
mother, this child of fortime entered a world which 
he was destined to touch with a greater diversity 
of influence in fewer years than any man of his 
time or since. His father, a total bjLisiness failure, 
passed out of his life ere he outgrew his babyhood. 
His beautiful and talented mother, mentor and 
companion to him in his earliest years, died when 
he was eleven. Regarding this parentage there 
has been much wicked controversy. In a letter to 
Jefferson in 1813, John Adams called Hamilton 
"the bastard brat of a Scotch peddler."' Adams 
cannot be forgiven such scurrilous calumny. In 
this respect, he permitted himself to be classified 
with the notorious scandal-monger, Callender, who 
dubbed Hamilton "the son of the camp-girl."^ The 
truth is clear. His father was of the great Scotch 
"House of Hamilton" and his mother descended 
directly from a noble French Huguenot family 
which, after the re"^bcation of the Edict of Naptes 
by Louis XIV, deserted its native land rather than 

' Historical Magazine, Jtily, 1870. 

^ The Prospect Before the United States, by J. T. Callender, 
1800. 

75 



Sfje (Creates;! American 

betray its religion. As a matter of fact, however, 
those venomous critics who have flung deprecatory- 
slander at the legitimacy of Hamilton's birth, think- 
ing thus to weaken the pedestals beneath his emi- 
nence, have only emphasized his prodigious record 
of achievement. If, in addition to all the other 
barriers he had to overcome, this sinister birth- 
mark, however false, barred his way, his ultimate 
triimiphs pass from marvels to miracles. 

Maternal relatives gave young Hamilton casual 
hospitality until 1769, when he flimg dependence 
aside and went to Work in Nicholas Cruger's 
general store and counting house on St. Croix. The 
boy of twelve had put his hand to the plow, never 
to relinquish it. The keen commercial sense which 
later made him America's pioneer economist was 
promptly demonstrated by a business precocity 
which swiftly brought him the full burden of 
Cruger's affairs. The avidity for learning which 
later made him the scholar of the American Revolu- 
tion was as promptly demonstrated by his mastery, 
during infrequent leisure, of Latin, Greek, Hebrew 
and mathematics, with Shakespeare, Milton, Plato, 
Pope and Plutarch for his most intimate and 
cherished companions. 

Bent on perfected education and assisted by 

76 



tS^fje (Greatest American 

admiring friends who sensed his embryo genius, 
Hamilton shortly set sail for America, fully con- 
fident in his own resoiirces, but little dreaming of 
the r61e destiny had in store for him. He landed 
in Boston in October, 1772, fifteen years of age, 
and promptly journeyed to New York, which was 
isome day derisively to be called " Hamiltonopolis " 
in the lexicon of frustrated, disgruntled politicians 
to whom the "young West Indian" ultimately 
became as Nemesis. 

Schooling commenced in Barber's Grammar 
School, Elizabethtown, New Jersey. Soon Hamil- 
ton was ready for college. Princeton, his first 
choice, required too much regularity of progress 
to permit of the mettlesome strides Hamilton in- 
tended. He entered King's College, now Columbia, 
in the autumn of 1773. 

The prophecy of revolution by now lay upon his 
adopted land. The boy of sixteen took the cause 
of the oppressed colonies to heart with all the inde- 
fatigable zeal and incorrigible enthusiasm which 
made his whole career invincible. On July 6, 1 774, 
a striphng in years and physique, he pushed his 
unbidden way to the rostrimi at the famous "Meet- 
ing in The Fields," called to impress the New York 
Assembly with the people's purpose to have their 

77 



State represented in the First Continental Con- 
gress; and he so dominated the hour's appeal 
against morcescent monarchy that he marked him- 
self for a leadership in Freedom's forward march 
which from that moment down to his untimely 
death he never yielded up. 

Political exhortation in these early days was 
voiced largely through pamphlets and widely circu- 
lated essays. Hamilton found these agencies well 
suited to his homiletic powers. Two vigorous 
Tory tracts appeared following " The Meeting in 
The Fields" and the first session of the Conti- 
nental Congress. Hamilton answered them in kind 
and clinched a posture so commanding that Royal- 
ists offered futile bribes to win so dangerous an 
adversary to the crown. 

The drama soon moved out of platitudes and 
into powder. Hamilton was as ready to fight as 
he had been to write. His were no cloistered phi- 
losophies which scorned to practice what they 
preached. He went eagerly into a volimteer corps 
of fervid patriots who proposed that Lexington and 
Concord and Bunker Hill should not have chal- 
lenged tyranny in vain ; and soon he graduated, on 
March 14, 1776, to the captaincy of New York's 
first company of artillery. "From this point his 

78 



career in the American world began," writes Pro- 
fessor Stimner in his none too friendly biography.' 
' ' It was a great career, because it had some per- 
vading ideas, and they were not ideas of personal 
interest and ambition. He became the repre- 
sentative of Union and energy. His admirers 
applauded him, and his enemies abused him, as an 
apostle of energy in government." 

With this gallant company of artillery, Hamil- 
ton battled valiantly through ten hard and crucial 
months, only quitting the combat ranks, where he 
displayed empyreal courage and utter contempt 
of personal safety, when General Washington won 
his reluctant consent to the proposition that his 
many-sided genius could bulk heavier for his coim- 
try's cause as Aide and Military Secretary to the 
Commander-in-Chief of all the armies battling for 
the higher aspirations of human-kind. He was 
military confidant and trusted proxy to Washing- 
ton for four terrific years, rendering a conspicuous 
service which shall be set down in later detail. 
Upon the occasion of one crucial mission to Al- 
bany, which tested to the limit both his diplomacy 
and his implacable determination, he met Miss 

' Alexander Hamilton, by Professor William Graham 
Sumner. 

79 



^f)t (Greatest American 

Betsy Schuyler, daughter of a sturdy and promi- 
nent patriot house, who became his bride in 
December, 1780, and remained his cherished wife 
down to the cruel ending of his brilliant days. 
Eight children were born to this happy, contented 
union over a span of twenty subsequent years. 
Hamilton's final active military exploit was to 
lead the first assault at Yorktown where Lord 
Comwallis gave up his sword and Britain yielded 
her American dominion forever. 

In 1782, at the age of twenty-five, Hamilton 
began to build his career of civil and political 
and professional and economic triumph. After 
four months' preparation, hasty but profoundly 
thorough, he qualified as a lawyer; and his sub- 
sequent dominating leadership of the American bar, 
at a time of prolific genius, testified to the super- 
lative character of an intellect which could make so 
much out of such scant advantages. Offered a Com- 
missionership of the French Loan, discussed for 
the British- American Peace Embassy, he took his 
first public office in Jime, 1782, when Robert Morris 
appointed him Continental Receiver of Taxes for 
New York. His labors in this capacity were 
dynamically prophetic, but essentially futile. 
There never was a moment when he was not years 

80 



^f}C (Greatest American 

ahead of his dissonant generation. Yet, so marked 
an impression did he make upon the New York 
Legislature that in November he was elected to 
the Continental Congress. "All this brilliant 
array of literary, military and professional triumphs 
had been won by the orphan boy of the distant 
island of the Indian Seas, at twenty-five years of 
age," one historian wrote of him at this jimcture.^ 
"We question whether so rapid and so brilliant a 
career is presented by the history of any other 
statesman of any age or country." 

In the Continental Congress, Hamilton promptly 
was awarded that attention which his power and his 
personality exacted from any environment which 
his intellect chose to dominate. He found himself 
in a moribund assembly; but he allowed no static 
barriers to discourage his zeal or dilute his ideals 
or shatter his immutable tenacity. His greatest 
efforts immediately addressed themselves to the 
tottering Confederation's debts and taxes. He 
led the fight for an impost on imports and particu- 
larly addressed himself to Rhode Island's obstinate 
and menacing refusal to accept a plan which would 
have provided continuing federal revenues. But 

' Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Samuel M. 
Schmucker, 1856. 



^f)c ^reatesit iamerican 

his was almost a lone voice seeking what he de- 
scribed as a "continental policy." He fought the 
impotence and ingratitude which disgracefully 
proposed to disband the Continental Army and 
send home these gallant crusaders without so much 
as a pretense of providing for their long arrears of 
pay. In this posture he was once more the strong 
right arm and the mouth-piece of Washington, 
who, with a sublimity of unselfish courage which 
was the trade-mark of his character, checked at 
Newburgh a rebellion of these ill-used troops which 
easily could have precipitated ruin upon the bud- 
ding Republic. Hamilton strove, too, for the re- 
tention of a moderate army as a nucleus for defense ; 
but the weak and imcertain parliament in which he 
sat confessed its own caliber and impotence by 
reducing this force to the astounding minimimi of 
eighty mercenaries. Defeated in all his aspira- 
tions, save in dissuading Robert Morris from 
resignation, Hamilton sought to have the debates 
published and the sessions opened to the public. 
His was the first voice ever raised in behalf of 
publicity as a governmental purgative. He had 
no secrets from the people and feared only the 
machinations that secrecy protected and induced. 
But again he was defeated and told to go out on 

'82 



the balcony and make his speeches if he sought 
a wider audience. The time was rapidly approach- 
ing when the whole government would be his 
"balcony" and the whole world his pit. One 
year in the Continental Congress, while barren 
of tangible fruits, steeled his conviction that the 
future of his beloved country hung upon a new and 
sturdier Union. To this inevitable end he pro- 
posed to bide his time. Refusing earnestly urged 
re-election to a Congress which was but an empty 
shell, a hollow mockery, he took up his residence 
in New York, and in three years of private practice 
of his avowed profession, swept to the unchallenged 
leadership of the American bar. 

Conditions in the enervated Confederacy had 
now brought colonial fortunes to their lowest ebb. 
Spurned and exploited abroad, the States, con- 
sumed at home by jealousies, commercial strifes and 
suspicious prides, were at the mercy of disaster. 
"Shay's Rebellion" in Massachusetts snatched the 
mask from pretense and displayed the ugl}^ mien 
of creeping anarchy, even as it disclosed the pitiful 
nakedness of a broken governmental power. The 
nearer a disease approaches to a crisis, the nearer 
it approaches to a cure. In the prologue of hard 
and uncertain experience, the stage was being set 

83 



^^)t ^vtatt&t American 

for the Master Unionist to marshal the forces that 
were to preserve American constitutional liberty 
to the ages. Bowdoin, in Massachusetts, had 
forced a resolution of instructions for a bettered 
coalition, but had failed of their execution. 
Virginia and Maryland, having found reciprocal 
advantage in a commercial compact, proposed a 
general convention at Annapolis for an extension 
of this helpful comity throughout the States. This 
was the opening wedge. With prompt enthusiasm 
Hamilton leaped to the invitation as to the coming 
of salvation. His little band of stalwart Conti- 
nentalists forced New York representation in the 
proposed convention and Hamilton hastened to 
Annapolis as the authorized spokesman of his 
Commonwealth. The Annapolis gathering, lack- 
ing authoritative scope in its flaccid credentials, 
could not approach fundamentals in its work; but 
it adopted an address, prepared by Hamilton, 
which challenged the distraught coimtry to a frank 
contemplation of its pitiful demoralization and 
demanded another convention which should be 
attended by delegates with general powers. In 
other words, it organized the campaign which was 
to make America. 

The Constitutional Convention, outgrowth of 

84 



^fje ^reatesst J^merican 

the Annapolis aspirations, met in Philadelphia and 
started upon its immortal labors on the 25th of 
May, i787.*^Hamilton sat from New York, amid 
a recalcitrant delegation and, after playing a con- 
spicuous part in the deliberations, was the sole 
New Yorker to affix his signature to the final honor 
roll which committed the present Constitution of 
the United States to a blessed and grateful pos- 
terity. But for his lonesome courage, what is now 
the greatest State in the Union would have been 
robbed of this honorable association. 

Then came the desperate struggle for ratifica- 
tion; and once more came the resistless Hamilton, 
the hero of every breach, to marshal the battle- 
lines. Without him history might easily have taken 
different and ominous trend. The detailed analysis 
elsewhere in this volume only approximates the 
tale. He wrote "The Federalist," the mightiest 
homily on government ever issued from the pen 
of man, a series of expositions which is still the 
favorite recourse of bench and bar, at home and 
abroad, in soimding the purpose and the meaning 
of The Constitution. Then he won his way into 
the decisive New York Convention and, in 1788, 
by sheer magicry of masterful appeal, turned a 
hostile hard-committed majority of twenty-six 

85 



tE^fje (SreateiJt American 

against the Constitution into a ratifying majority 
of two. New York was pivotal in the affairs of 
the swaddling Republic. New York and Hamilton 
made America's great adventure possible. 

But "the business of America's happiness," as 
Hamilton put it, "was yet to be done." The 
triimiph of a theory had now to be vindicated in 
effective practice. Hamilton was ready, as al- 
ways, for the supreme responsibility. It is no re- 
flection upon the mighty force and character and 
inestimable contribution of President Washington, 
elected in 1789, to say that the " supreme responsi- 
bility" fell to his Secretary of the Treasury. It is 
merely a confession of the fact that the new govern- 
ment was to rise or fall, live or die, as it succeeded 
or failed to meet its greatest, pressing, crucial 
problems in federal finance. That Hamilton de- 
serves well-nigh exclusive credit for snatching suc- 
cess from failure, is denied by no truthful historian. 
He wrote the mighty messages which inspired the 
whole original creation of a practical governmental 
structure. Though his official station involved 
merely the Treasury Department, which he served 
as its first and greatest Secretary, his fecund genius 
touched every branch of the Great Experiment 
with constructive suggestion and resultful purpose. 

86 



Wi)t (^reategt American 

With swift versatility he flung his besought coun- 
sels in every needful direction. He pioneered in 
finance, in political economy, in interpretive law. 
To epitomize his omniscient services, the contribu- 
tions of a Titan, would be impossible. He was 
America's first dominating Administrator. No^ 
student can do justice to his honorable memory 
without consulting the subsequent analyses for 
which this sketch affords only the chronology. Suf- 
fice it here to say that he foimded the Treasury, 
the national banking system, the basic theories of 
federal taxation and the currency, and erected all 
the essential machinery for these and a multitude 
of other purposes. He enimciated for the first 
time the policy of tariff protection, which has since 
lived in a century and a half of controversy, and 
the doctrine of "implied constitutional powers" — 
two great doctrines over which major political par- 
ties have historically divided ever since, yet which 
have been firmly fixed in the generally accepted 
tenets of American government. He soimded the 
first call to a federal policy of internal improve- 
ments at public expense. In a word, he was the 
torch of progress. "The mind of the yoimg sol- 
dier-statesman — who was armed with a moral 
dignity and earnestness characteristic alike of 

87 



tlTfje (l^reatesit American 

Puritan and Huguenot, with an inborn genius for 
organization, and with special aptitude for eco- 
nomics and finance — went like an arrow to the 
heart of the problem with which the financiers of 
the Revolution were struggling in vain.'" "He 
armed the government with credit and with a 
productive revenue, "wrote Senator Lodge in 1882.^ 
" He won for it the hearty good-will of the business 
world; he gave it a potent ally in the national 
bank ; by the f imding system and the bank he drew 
out and welded together, with the strong influence 
of pecuniary interest, a powerful class which knew 
no State lines; and by his protective policy and 
internal improvements he aimed to create yet an- 
other vigorous body of supporters, and give the 
government still more strength and popularity. 
It was a great policy, the work of a master-mind 
looking far into the future. It was the foundation 
of a great party and the corner-stone from which 
the federal government was built." 

Hamilton now foimd himself at the head of a 
definite, piirposeful American political group, 
America's first political party in "-any sense 

' Hannis Taylor in The Origin and Growth of The American 
Constitution. 

^ Life of Hamilton, by Henry Cabot Lodge. 

88 



QTfje (Creates;! American 

approximating modern usage. The Federalists, 
loosely held together heretofore by bonds of com- 
mon fidelity to the ideals of government which 
Hamilton eloquently preached in essays from which 
these Federalists borrowed their name, were welded 
together into a close political entity by the fraternity 
of battle. Washington was their President; but 
Hamilton was their Generalissimo. No less did 
the conflict over Hamilton's fiscal policies, particu- 
larly his success in forcing the honorable assump- 
tion of the States' war debts, and his emphatic 
conquests in the interests of centralized constitu- 
tional authority, serve to cement the Anti-Feder- 
alists into a consolidated group whose chief 
inspiration was personal opposition to the one man 
who personified every victory fought and won in be- 
half of Union and the Constitution. To this group, 
feebly led by the brilliant but vacillating Madison, 
Thomas Jefferson brought policy and direction. 
Slowly, subtly and, at first, covertly, Jefferson 
aligned hostilities. He first showed his hand in a 
futile attack on John Adams; quickly profited by 
this experience; saw the necessity of a continuing 
public journal as the vehicle of effective propa- 
ganda ; established a subservient editor in The Na- 
tional Gazette; and opened a bitter attack, by proxy, 

89 



^f)t (Greatest ilmerican 

on Hamilton and the Administration. He 
bombarded Washington with correspondence dep- 
recating Hamiltonian poHcies until, stung by 
these organized hostilities, Washington set down 
the whole indictment against Hamilton in writing 
and sent it to his First Friend. No conjured abuse 
or defamation had been left undraf ted ; but Hamil- 
ton promptly replied in an unimpassioned and 
unanswerable document which riddled his de- 
tractors and completely satisfied the great man 
charged with supreme responsibilities. Having 
thus dispatched the indictment with cold, imper- 
sonal logic, Hamilton flew at its authors with 
intemperate fury. In a scorching crusade, as 
brilliant as it was inappropriate in a Minister of 
State, he so humbled and humiliated his adver- 
saries that Washington had to admonish both 
Jefferson and Hamilton to desist. It was a short 
armistice. Jefferson and Madison soon renewed 
the offensive in a direct effort to drive Hamilton 
from public life. They questioned the integrity 
of the Secretary of the Treasury and his fiscal 
policies through a series of congressional inquiries 
which Hamilton again met with fearless candor, 
complete vindication for his impeccable integrity, 
and correspondingly increased prestige. The com- 

90 



tirije (f^reatesft American 

pression of these epochal events into colorless 
paragraphs conveys poor idea of their vital impor- 
tance in the evolution of American institutions, 
and pays even poorer compliment to the burden- 
bearer who dared every hazard and every circum- 
stance in bringing early fruition in this inspired 
plan for government by self-determination. It 
seems necessary again to say that this condensed 
biography is but the framework into which subse- 
quent studies in this volume shall be fitted in due 
course. 

Foreign involvements now precipitated crisis 
upon the struggling government in new directions ; 
and once more, with that rare versatility which 
seemed equal to any emergency, Hamilton became 
both coimselor and executive officer to Washing- 
ton, though these concerns were nominally in 
the jurisdiction of another Minister. Though our 
official relations with France were far from satisfac- 
tory at this time and though Jefferson had failed 
to secure a satisfactory commercial treaty while at 
Paris, toward France there was a deep underlying 
sense of popular gratitude and affection which pro- 
duced a reflex of universal joy and acclaim when the 
news first came that France had dethroned mon- 
archy and proposed a RepubHc. The invitation 

91 



TOc ^vtatc^t American 

and the inclination to sympathetic fraternalism 
was very human and very real. But as the French 
Revolution graduated from red excess to crim- 
son outrage, saner minds in America retrenched 
and enthusiasm began to fade. Washington and 
Hamilton dominated this trend. But as this 
group cooled, the Jacobins in America became 
more radical than ever and soon this division 
drifted into white-hot domestic faction. War be- 
tween France and England in April, 1793, flung 
new fuel to these flames because mutual hatreds 
between England and America were still fresh and 
ugly. The sudden announcement that a Minister 
from this new and questionable French Republic 
had arrived in Charleston forced immediate de- 
cision upon what America's policy toward the 
belligerents should be. Jefferson recommended 
to Washington that he lodge responsibility for this 
decision in an extra session of the Congress. Ham- 
ilton declared that the responsibility belonged 
with the executive and recommended a prompt 
proclamation of strong, strict neutrality that 
should fix our status for all time as independent 
of European frictions and fortimes. Jefferson 
wanted all our former treaty obligations, running 
to the former monarchy, to be acknowledged as of 

92 



Wf)t <^rcatesit American 

full, continuing power and effect. Hamilton pro- 
posed to take advantage of this fortuitous oppor- 
tunity to discharge these legacies of the past and 
further effect complete American emancipation 
from entangling, alien bonds. Washington's mind, 
as usual, ran along with Hamilton's upon whose 
advice he acted. The Proclamation of Neutrality, 
setting a traditional American fashion which has 
lived to bless uncounted generations, was promptly 
issued. Further Cabinet controversy was inter- 
rupted by the personal appearance of the French 
Minister, Citizen Genet, himself. Genet rushed 
headlong from one embarrassing excess to an- 
other. Hamilton recommended drastic measures 
to protect OUT neutrality against these brazen in- 
fractions. He refused to compromise with French 
privateering engineered by Genet out of American 
ports against British commerce. Genet's actions, 
culminating in the famous case of the "Little 
Sarah," openly flaunted American authority. No 
less insultingly, he appealed to the American people 
over the heads of their government, to rise to the 
support of the red Republic over-seas. Hamilton 
wrote his "Pacificus" essays in 1793 to answer 
this maudlin propaganda and arouse thinking 
Americans to the gravity of a situation which 

93 



threatened not alone the honor but the actual 
integrity of the new American government. Genet 
finally made the fatal error of raising a direct issue 
with Washington, and the tides of public sentiment 
turned upon him and his power for mischief came 
to an abrupt end. In the beginnings of our foreign 
relations, even as in our domestic affairs, Hamilton 
in the pilot house, Hamilton's hand upon the 
wheel, had ruddered the Ship of State through 
shoals to safety and left a chartered course for the 
guidance of other mariners in storms to come with 
new decades and centuries. 

England now promptly succeeded to the center of 
our turbulent stage. Ever since the conclusion 
of peace in 1783, with ill-concealed hostility, 
England had sought by every hindrance to em- 
barrass and destroy our commerce. Our efforts 
to remedy these predicaments through the nego- 
tiations of Minister Hammond had met with but 
indifferent success. Finally these aggressions be- 
came so aggravated that open breach seemed inevi- 
table. Hamilton denoimced them as outrageous and 
demanded that the coimtry be put under prepara- 
tion for effective war, but simultaneously recom- 
mended to Washington that a special mission be 
sent to London in a last effort at conciliation. 

94 



tK^fje (Creates;! J^merican 

Hamilton himself was obviously the most eligible 
man in America for such a delicate and profoimdly 
important pilgrimage and Washington eagerly 
turned to him as the appropriate and dependable 
Ambassador. But Hamilton's enemies, fearing 
to allow him this tremendous opportunity for 
mighty service and resultantly increased prestige, 
made bitter and politically selfish protest. Hamilton 
himself, with customary poise, urgently recommend- 
ed Jay, and Washington prudently acquiesced in 
order to avoid unnecessary faction. For the sake of 
peace, Jay's instructions were somewhat softened, 
after Hamilton had drawn their outline, in the 
direction of greater concessions to England, and the 
emissary was dispatched upon his momentous way. 
In the interim, ere Jay returned, Hamilton put 
down the "Whiskey RebelHon," opportimely dem- 
onstrating that the new government had muscle 
equal to its ideals ; completed his prescient financial 
program; and, in 1795 resigned his portfoho and 
retired to private life. But when Jay's Treaty was 
brought back home in 1796 he strode back into 
the arena once more to defend his principles, his 
purposes, his policies and his friends. The Treaty 
was not such an engagement as Hamilton would 
have negotiated had he been the American com- 

95 



tKte (Greatest American 

missioner. But the alternative choices of the hour 
pointed either to its acceptance in spite of its de- 
fects or to almost certain war with England. To 
accept it was the obvious propriety and Hamilton 
promptly took his place by Washington's side in 
the desperate conflict that ensued. All the pas- 
sions of anti-British hates and prejudices attacked 
the Treaty, its author, the Senate, the President 
and the intrepid New Yorker, now a private citi- 
zen, who had proposed and largely directed the 
mission. Jay was btirned in effigy uncounted 
times. Washington was attacked for his **mock 
pageantry of monarchy and apish mimicry of 
kings"; was taunted with being the tool of Ham- 
ilton; and even impeachment was demanded. 
Hamilton himself was stoned. But these were not 
ordinary men to be daunted by peril or hindered 
by attack. Hamilton immediately resorted to his 
invincible pen. The tremendous essays of ' ' Camil- 
lus" stemmed the adverse tide. But England 
now complicated an already treacherous situation 
with monumental but customary stupidity. She 
renewed the obnoxious provision order which had 
already hastened crisis. Neither Washington nor 
Hamilton believed in peace-at-any-price. This 
latest imposition was intolerable. Washington 

96 



tlTfje #reatefift iSmerican 

drew his closest counselors together. Hamilton 
was first, as though he had never left the Cabinet. 
A final effort at conciliation, consonant with honor, 
was agreed upon. Hamilton was inclined to be 
more aggressive, but fully sustained Washington's 
decision to ratify the Treaty and send it to Eng- 
land with a stem remonstrance against the pro- 
vision order. This final effort brought at least 
a temporary lull in frictions, though Hamilton 
faced the continuing responsibility long afterward 
of defending the Jay Treaty and all of its propo- 
nents against fierce popular attack. But he never 
hesitated to affirm that our motto should be: 
"Peace and trade with all nations; beyond our pres- 
ent engagements, political connections with none." 
In the midst of this turmoil the country faced 
the necessity of electing a presidential successor 
to Washington, who refused a third term. Hamil- 
ton was the leader of his party, imiversally 
acknowledged such by friend and foe. Indeed he 
was the incarnation of his party. But he was not 
a politician in any sense of that abused word. If 
ever a man typified the sharp distinction between 
a "politician" and a "statesman" it was Hamil- 
ton, He never gave a thought to his own convinc- 
ing and commanding eligibility as Washington's 
7 97 



tc;^e iilreatcst American 

executive successor. He favored the election either 
of John Adams, who ultimately won by the narrow 
margin of three electoral votes, or Thomas Pinck- 
ney of South Carolina. When Adams came to 
the Presidency he cherished a deep resentment 
because Hamilton had not been his sled-length 
advocate. Though he was a sturdy old patriot 
of sterling heart, he was unreasonable, irascible 
and intolerant, and he now became intensely 
hostile toward the man with whom he, despite his 
high station, had to share his party's titular leader- 
ship and inspiration. He made the mistake of 
first attempting to ignore Hamilton, and then to 
crush him. Hamilton's imperious nature, girded 
with the consciousness of his own lofty and im- 
personal conduct, rebelled against this ungenerous 
posture. He had no aims, no aspirations, for him- 
self — only for his country. He sought no personal 
credits. Cheerfully he had subordinately served 
Washington without an unfaithful or a selfish 
thought and was ready to continue in the role of 
"fidus Achates" under the new regime. But he 
would not, and did not, allow his authority and 
prestige — greater than- that of any private citi- 
zen who ever lived — to be flouted and ignored. 
Disastrous breach was inevitable. 

98 



^f)t (Creates!! American 

Hamilton's personal ambitions at this time are 
best tested by his refusal, April 24, 1798, of an 
appointment to the Senate to fill a vacancy created 
by the resignation of Judge Hobart. "I am 
obliged by my situation to decline the appoint- 
ment," he wrote. "There may arrive a crisis 
when I may conceive myself boimd once more to 
sacrifice the interests of my family to public call. 
But I must defer the change as long as possible." 

As our relations with England improved, our 
relations with France once more progressed from 
bad to worse. The threat of war had been averted 
in the one direction only to be renewed in the other. 
Hamilton's plan of a Commission to France was 
adopted in the hope that it might serve for peace 
as effectually as had his plan for the Jay mission 
in the prior case of England. "Real firmness is 
good for everything; strut is good for nothing," he 
had said, anent policies toward France, in a letter 
to a friend. But the selection of the personnel of 
this Commission was as disastrous to the President 
and his cause as was similar error upon the occasion 
of another mission to Paris in our own time. Ham- 
ilton had definite ideas as to who should go upon 
this delicate errand and if he could have had his 
way eventualities imquestionably would have been 

99 



^fje ^xtattit American 

different. But Adams, obsessed with the idea that 
his hand was being forced, chose otherwise. The 
outcome is history. Adams' Commissioners were 
insulted and outraged and finally driven from 
France. The famous X. Y. Z. papers disclosed 
the degrading depths to which American honor 
had been dragged. Quickly followed new and 
surpassing depredations by the French, new de- 
crees ravishing neutral rights and finally the burn- 
ing of an American ship by a French privateer. 
The passions that a few years before had burned 
so fiercely against England now burst into white- 
heat anger aimed at France. The country swept 
itself toward war. Congress sped all necessary 
measures of defense. Washington was recalled 
to serve as Commander-in-Chief. He consented 
to the draft provided Hamilton should become 
first upon his staff and the active leader in the new 
and perilous adventure. Adams agreed to this 
arrangement, but undertook upon his own re- 
sponsibility to displace Hamilton with Knox. 
Washington's threat to resign forced Adams to 
amend his course, though his himiiliation seared 
him with a pyramiding dislike of Hamilton 
which now became a desperate, incontinent and 
indefensible passion. 

lOO 



Hamilton at once attacked his new problems 
with habitual zeal. This story, like each of the 
other major motifs in his life, is told in detail else- 
where in this volume. Suffice it to say that he 
proved himself a brilliant master of every branch 
of military science, and that he served as first 
ranking officer of the Army of the United States 
from Washington's death tintil his, Hamilton's 
honorable discharge. 

President Adams bungled the initial processes 
of peace even as he had the initial processes of war. 
He dealt secretly with France, ignoring even his 
Cabinet, and in selecting the personnel of his Peace 
Commission he threatened to duplicate the disaster 
which his stubbornness had invited in selecting the 
personnel of his Army. Again feeling ran high, 
and again a word from Hamilton would have crys- 
tallized havoc with no less sinister disaster than 
impended when Washington had faced his angry, 
revolting officers at Newburgh. But the word was 
never given. On the contrary, though bitterly 
impatient with Adams, Hamilton threw his whole 
mighty influence unreservedly into the scales and 
assisted the President of his country to save his 
country's situation. 

The elections of 1800 now came on — and with 

lOI 



them the beginning of the end. The Federalists 
were not only rent by internal discords precipi- 
tated by Adams' treatment of Hamilton, but also 
they were burdened with a popular displeasure 
which did not relish Adams' blunders and which 
was hostile to repressive war measures like the alien 
and sedition acts, which the Congress had passed. 
With that instinctive sagacity which never failed 
to sense a popular frenzy and turn it to political 
advantage, Jefferson proceeded with customary 
subtlety to plan himself into the Presidency. He 
raised a dual cry — States rights and the rights of 
man. The former roused Hamilton as could 
nothing else because it challenged his cherished 
theory of impregnable Constitutional Union: the 
latter stirred him because he read in it a covert 
call, no less lethal under fragrant name, to those 
excesses which were crushing France. Jefferson 
sounded off in the "Kentucky Resolutions" which 
declared that each State had an inalienable right 
to judge for itself whether or not any act of the 
central government constituted an infraction of 
the Constitution, and then to nullify the Act of 
Union if it deemed infringement to have occurred. 
Hamilton urged that such menace be disapproved 
formally by Congress and its kernels of disaster 

102 



^f}t (Greatest American 

laid bare. But the stage was set for temporary 
reaction from the FederaHst era and nothing could 
stem the tide of prejudice which Jefferson skill- 
fully directed to its mark. Pennsylvania was the 
first great Federalist defeat. The New York out- 
come immediately became crucial. The election 
of the legislature which in turn would chose presi- 
dential electors seemed destined to control the issue. 
Hamilton threw himself vigorously into the cam- 
paign. As always, his was the destiny to organize 
and lead the battle. At the head of his antagonists 
was Aaron Burr. Hamilton depended upon the 
weapons that had always stood him in good stead 
— brilliant speeches and vigorous pamphlets, frank 
and eloquent appeals to the brain and heart of his 
countrymen. But Burr appealed to their cupidity. 
He organized the first, sordid political machine, 
down to the last voting precinct in the last ward, 
American politics had known, and he set a first 
precedent for electoral corruption which has served 
as model for entirely too many subsequent plagia- 
rists. Burr won. Hamilton, in desperation, pro- 
posed that electors be chosen by districts out of the 
old State legislature, thus dividing New York's 
vote. Governor Jay refused. Internal party strife 
now became suicidally violent. Adams drove 

103 



JBf)t Greatest ^mevitan 

McHenry, Pickering and Wolcott from his Cabinet 
because they were too friendly to Washington and 
Hamilton, and further loosed an unbridled tongue 
upon his factional opponents, with particular of- 
fense to Hamilton. Twice Hamilton wrote for an 
explanation and was ignored. With his usual 
thoroughness and force he wrote a pamphlet to 
demonstrate Adams' blunders and to vindicate 
himself and his loyal Federalist followers. It was 
intended for private distribution. Burr either 
found' or stole' a copy and gave it to the nation. 
The result of this whole conspiracy of circimi- 
stance was inevitable. The Federalists were 
generally defeated. But the equal Democratic 
electoral vote received by Jefferson and Burr threw 
the presidential decision into the House of Repre- 
sentatives. It was another perilous hour in which 
a lesser leader than the "Colossus of the Federal- 
ists," as Jefferson called Hamilton, might have 
washed his hands of the whole bad affair and sub- 
mitted to disaster which might prematurely have 
ended the Republic's days. Reckless in the anger of 
defeat, the Federalists were inclined to connive with 
the willingly treacherous Burr to elevate him above 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

* Lodge's Life of Alexander Hamilton. 

104 



Wi)t (^vtSLttat American 

Jefferson. They held the balance of power. As 
one historian has put it, ' they preferred the knave 
to the hypocrite. Hamilton alone prevented this 
terrific error. He knew that Jefferson was the 
clear preference of a national majority. He fore- 
saw the dangers of licensed intrigue in high place. 
Above all, much as he distrusted Jefferson, he 
could not consent that an unscrupulous rascal 
should assinne supreme authority over a govern- 
ment to which he had dedicated his life. It was 
due to him alone that Aaron Burr did not become 
the third, and perhaps the last, President of the 
United States. It was due to him alone that his 
greatest rival reached the coveted honor toward 
which he had fashioned his every act and ambition 
back through the years. 

Hamilton now retired to the practice of law in 
New York where he reattained a brilliant profes- 
sional station. Burr quarreled with Jefferson who 
was now bent upon his, Burr's political destruction. 
To renew himself in prestige and authority, Burr 
became a candidate for Governor of New York, 
dreaming of a Northern Confederacy, with New 
York as a nucleus, which he might head. Ham- 
ilton promptly came from retirement, denounced 
' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

105 



^' 



these intrigues, fought this political guerilla toe to 
toe, and once more encompassed his defeat. He 
was saving his State and Nation at the expense of 
his own life. Burr decided upon revenge and 
pursued this purpose with vicious determination. 
Hamilton had obstructed and thwarted his ambi- 
tions at every turn of his career. With but one 
exception he had found "The Little Lion" con- 
stantly blocking the paths that led to a satisfac- 
tion of his crafty and unscrupulous ambitions. 
Deliberate murder must have been in his heart 
when he challenged Hamilton, because his choice 
of an excuse — a casual remark attributed to Hamil- 
ton at the time of the caucuses which nominated 
candidates for Governor — was comparatively in- 
offensive when paralleled with the bitter denuncia- 
tion of Burr that Hamilton had poured out in the 
campaign of 1 800. Formal letters were exchanged 
and the duel arranged. Hamilton loathed duel- 
ing. He had no desire to fight. But he felt that 
this greatest service to his beloved country re- 
quired him to prove unimpeachable courage as 
measured by any code — most of all the code which 
was most convincing to those whom he adjudged 
the enemies of his country's welfare. It merely 
adds to the sublimity of his character to know 

106 




The Hamilton Monument at Weehawken, New Jersey 



that only a short time before, Burr had come to 
him in great pecimiary distress and besought 
aid which Hamilton had readily granted out of the 
prodigal generosity of a benign heart. Burr pre- 
pared for the duel by pistol practice in his garden; 
Hamilton, by closing the affairs of clients who were 
dependent upon his offices. Hamilton concluded 
these preparations by penning beautifully touch- 
ing farewell letters to his wife ; Burr, by gathering 
together incriminating notes from women whom 
he had seduced, and arranging them with a hint to 
his beloved but penniless daughter that she might 
capitalize them into a pretty piece of blackmail. 
Such were the adversaries; such the actors in one 
of the greatest tragedies of time ! 

In the early morning of July ii, 1804, the men 
met at Weehawken on a grassy plot overlooking 
the Hudson River and Manhattan Island. At the 
first shot Hamilton fell, mortally wounded. His 
own pistol did not explode until he was falling to 
the ground. His own previously expressed mten- 
tion had been not to fire at the given word. He 
had refused to have the hair-spring trigger set. He 
had refused, previously, to practice by shooting at 
a mark. All this was not "irrelevant chivalry."* 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

107 



^tje <^reate£ft American 

It was the philosophy of a patriot who was fully 
convinced that the greatest final service he could 
render to his country was to shock it, by his death, 
into a realization of its dangers and its foes. 

Hamilton was immediately attended by a sur- 
geon. He was rushed back across the river to New 
York. After a few hours of excruciating pain, he 
passed to his reward. While Burr slunk away in 
hiding to escape the fury of an outraged people, 
Hamilton was birried with all the honors and 
tributes of fervid love and grateful veneration that 
a heart-stricken nation could pile upon his bier. 
"The mourning," wrote Fiske, ' "was like that 
called forth in after years by the murder of Abra- 
ham Lincoln." His remains were consigned to the 
earth in Trinity Churchyard, at the head of Wall 
Street, where to this day a modest monument, 
nestling near the southern fence, keeps eternal 
vigil over the ashes of The Greatest American. 

^Essays, Historical and Literary. Vol. I. 



io8 



2rfje illasiter iSuilber of American ?Hnion 

The erection of an indi visibly federalized Union 
of American states, impregnated with power suf- 
ficient unto its effective functioning and self- 
preservation, was the composite, God-inspired 
achievement of so many different minds and hearts, 
all fused in common aspiration, that no one man 
among the founders can be set apart and endowed 
with major credit for the creation. Any attempts 
at such ascription are narrow idolatry. Colonial 
America in the closing decades of the eighteenth 
century, emerging into republican autonomy, was 
blessed with too many leaders of sturdy courage 
and apocalyptic genius to allow grateful posterity to 
isolate any one of them and truthfully acknowledge 
to his memory an exclusive debt. To all who 
participated we must grant just veneration. But 
this multiplicity of obligation need not prevent a 
relative survey of the contribution made by each; 
and if such a survey comprehend: first, the concep- 
tion of the idea of the ultimately effected Union ; 

109 



tBi)t (^reatesft American 

second, the attainment of the Constitutional Con- 
vention in which the idea crystalHzed; third, the 
vitalization of the idea in the Constitution itself; 
fourth, the achievement of practical results through 
the Constitution's adoption; and, fifth, the fortifica- 
tion of the attained idea through the bulwarked 
establishment of its basic principles and most es- 
sential powers and interpretations, no one man can 
compete, in this variety of service, with Alexander 
Hamilton, who, by this token, becomes the Master 
Builder of American Union. 

From the moment when, as a campus youth, he 
startled New York by his uninvited but imap- 
proachable eloquence and logic at the famous 
"Meeting in The Field,"' he was the swaddling 
nation's premier advocate and proctor in liberty 
and federated Union. From that historic hour 
until he was shot down thirty years later, a martyr 
to his fidelities, he never ceased to be the inspiration 
and director of those forces in America which 
dedicated themselves to the attainment of those 
federated Union institutions that have been and 
are to-day the palladium of our ordered liberties. 

When Hamilton saw the terrific impotence of the 
old Continental Congress in its vacillating, inade- 

' July 6, 1774. 

no 



tS^f)^ <§reatesit American 

quate, timorous relations with General Washington; 
when he sensed the menace of this weak and all 
but futile authority, threatening its own aspirations 
by its own paralysis, he wrote to James Duane, 
himself a member of the Congress, and in an his- 
toric letter proposed, for the first time in the story 
of the States, a Convention for the purpose of 
creating a federal Constitution that should erect a 
central government capable of its own preservation 
and evolution. This was the first, modest, humble 
conception of the great undertaking that was ulti- 
mately to emancipate a people from their own inde- 
cision and scuttling uncertainties. It was speedily 
amplified in a series of six papers, together called 
"The Continentalist " which he wrote in the sum- 
mer of 1 78 1 and through which he eloquently 
expoimded the need for federal authority in all es- 
sential directions. A few months later he wrote 
to his bosom friend, the brilliant Laurens, that to 
make independence a blessing "we must sectire otir 
Union on solid fotmdations — a herciilean task, and 
to effect which moimtains of prejudice must be 
leveled." His was a lonesome oracle in these 
primordial days. But it was nonetheless consist- 
ent and persevering and prescient. It set the 
standard to which he was as constant as the needle 

III 



to the pole in every succeeding development in the 
disclosures of American destiny. The Master 
Builder, like the later heir to his faiths in the sub- 
sequent crises of Civil War, had but one plan upon 
his trestleboard — a plan that builded for America 
upon the solid cornerstone of indissoluble Union. 
When Hamilton accepted his first public trust 
of a civil, as distinguished from a military, charac- 
ter, in 1782, he forced the New York legislature — 
reluctant to negotiate the adventure, but convinced 
against its own prejudice and timidity — to pass 
resolutions demanding a new constitutional con- 
vention and a closer consolidation of the States. 
This federalization of America was his passion, 
even as to-day it is his monimient. He was in con- 
stant communication with Washington during 
these uncertain days when independence had been 
won but not insured. He alone fully caught the 
aspirations of the great, exalted leader whom 
affectionate tradition has called "The Father of 
His Country." He tmderstood as did no other 
American of his time what it was in Washington's 
heart that prompted the General's circular letter 
to the Governors of the States, praying for "an 
indissoluble Union of the States under one federal 
head." He understood because it was his own 

112 



^Ije #reates:t American 

blazed trail down which Washington was proud to 
travel. "Unless Congress have powers competent 
to all general purposes," Washington wrote Ham- 
ilton,' "the distresses we have encountered, the 
expense we have incurred and the blood we have 
spilt, will avail us nothing." These two tremen- 
dous toilers for posterity were in a union of hopes 
and aspirations no less cemented than the Union of 
States for which they prayed and strove. The role 
Washington played in ultimate achievement shall 
never be depreciated. But if he were here to-day 
it would not be the mere magnanimity for which he 
was famous which would produce his prompt testi- 
mony to Hamilton's incalculably indispensable 
contribution. Such testimony would but reflect a 
true estimate of historical values and historical 
justice. 

The eminent historical authority, Hannis Taylor, 
in his great work upon "The Origin and Growth 
of the American Constitution" gives Pelatiah 
Webster credit for being the first proponent of a 
federal constitutional convention. Passing that 
argimient, the fact remains that Taylor himself 
puts heavy emphasis upon Hamilton's pioneer 
record. He declares that when Hamilton, himself 

' Sparks' Washington. Vol. VI 11. 
* 113 



Wtit <§reates!t ^mtxicmi 

then a member of the Continental Congress, on 
April I, 1783, expressed in Congress his desire "to 
see a general convention take place, and that he 
would soon, in pursuance of instructions from his 
constituents, propose to Congress a plan for that 
purpose," it was the ^^5/ time such an aspiration 
had been voiced on the floor of Congress ; and that 
when Congress, four weeks later, appointed a com- 
mittee on pending resolutions in favor of a general 
convention, "so far as the records show never till 
then" had the undertaking been thus dignified. 
Thus did Hamilton press every advantage in behalf 
of the great American experiment. 

When Maryland and Virginia composed an inter- 
state commercial compact and proposed a general 
convention at Annapolis in 1786 that should make 
these commercial undertakings uniform throughout 
the States, Hamilton saw the possibility that this 
limited and quite unpromising invitation might be 
capitalized into the larger project which he knew to 
be at the vitals of a preserved America. He dropped 
his fast multiplying and profitable private fortunes 
and leaped to the forward march. "He never let 
'I dare not' wait upon 'I would.*"' He forced 
New York to send a delegation to Annapolis and 

' Macbeth. 

114 



W\)t (^reatesit American 

headed it in person. He foxind his associates, 
other than those from New Jersey, bound by 
limited credentials which precluded any major 
project. But with that invincible logic and elo- 
quence, before which no unsound opposition 
could ever stand, he forced the Annapolis conven- 
tion to adopt an address which he drew, challeng- 
ing national candor to concede the desperate ne- 
cessity for a complete re-organization of the 
government, and calling for a new convention to 
meet these needs and to be attended by repre- 
sentatives clothed with general powers sufficient 
imto this end. 

Returning to New York, he won a seat in the 
New York legislature that he might lead in the 
active battle as he had in the councils which 
precipitated it. He was facing the batteries of 
Governor Clinton, the most powerful pohtician 
of his day, an executive who appealed to mass 
psychology because he had made New York the 
greatest State in the Confederation. Clinton 
was bitterly arraigned against any new federal- 
ization that should curb the prerogatives of the 
States or erect a super-sovereignty above them. 
He held his legislature in the hollow of his hand. 
It was the first, but not the last, of the tremen- 

115 



tIDfje <^reate£ft American 

dous conflicts which Hamilton, now thirty years of 
age, had to win against hostile majorities that were 
committed against him in advance. It was the 
first, but not the last, occasion in which he was 
conjuror and conqueror alike in behalf of the new 
freedom. No other man lived in that era who 
could have done the particular things he did — and 
those particular things were absolutely vital. Such 
achievement required a rare combination of elo- 
quence, logic, pertinacity, courage and personality. 
Above all it required a dominating intellect which 
could lead against all odds — a pillar of cloud by 
day, a pillar of fire by night. Hamilton forced 
Clinton's legislature to vote New York representa- 
tion in the Constitutional Convention soon to 
gather in Philadelphia, and he forced his own 
election as one of New York's three Commis- 
sioners, the other two being stubborn. States- 
rights' Clintonians. The greatest human achieve- 
ment of ancient or modern times was now in 
distant sight, though stupendous barriers still all 
but obscured the goal. 

On May 14, 1787, the great Constitutional Con- 
vention assembled in Philadelphia. On May 25 
it secured a quorum and, under the inspired Presi- 
dency of General Washington, proceeded to its 

116 



Kf)e ^reatcgt American 

tremendous tasks. Never was there a human 
parliament of higher average intellect and purpose ; 
yet, amid such competition "Hamilton was easily 
the most brilliant man in the company." ' General 
opinions divided between the "Virginia Plan" 
and the "New Jersey Plan." The former contem- 
plated a Union of the People; the latter a mere 
league of States. Hamilton was satisfied with 
neither. Although he did not take a continu- 
ously active part upon the floor of the convention, 
chiefly because he was inevitably out-voted when- 
ever his packed New York delegation spoke, in a 
six-hour speech which all history testifies to have 
been the masterpiece of its time and occasion, he 
presented his own alternative to the two pending 
skeletons. Gouverneur Morris declared this speech 
"the most able and impressive he had ever heard " ; 
and Roosevelt has said that Morris was a 
"shrewder more far-seeing observer and recorder 
of contemporary men and events than any other 
American or foreign statesman of his time."^ 

The most striking novelty which Hamilton 
proposed was the election by State Electors of a 
Senate and a President who shoiild serve for life 

' Robert W. McLaughlin's Washington and Lincoln. 
^ Life of Gouverneur Morris, by Theodore Roosevelt. 

117 



^fje ^xtattit American 

unless removed for cause. The motif permeating 
his entire structure was a powerful, centralized 
federal authority resting upon selective suffrage. 
His basic purposes were dual: first, to avoid "any 
confederation leaving the states in possession of 
their sovereignty," as Madison tells us in his 
"Reports" ; second, to avoid that mutability in the 
institutions of government which he feared would 
be unstabilizing in whatever degree lack of central 
power should permit. For this latter conviction 
Hamilton has been traditionally scheduled as an 
aristocrat in contradistinction to a democrat. 
If this brand, "aristocrat," intends odium in 
this relation it is no more deserved than would 
be kindred imputation against Washington. No 
impious hands seek to soil Washington's spotless 
mantle merely because he was the richest man of 
his period. It is equally absurd to impugn the 
motives of Hamilton, who built his genius from the 
himiblest beginnings amid poverty and handicap, 
merely because he believed in safe-guarding de- 
mocracy against its own passions in order that the 
best elements of democracy might be successfully 
protected against those self-contained dangers 
which his superior knowledge of history and human 
kind warned him were greatly to be feared. "Give 

ii8 



tlTfje i^reatesit l^merican 

all power to the many and they will oppress the 
few," Madison tells us Hamilton argued. "Give 
all power to the few and they will oppress the many. 
Both, therefore, ought to have the power that each 
may defend itself against the other." A sounder 
philosophy was never pronounced: and the best 
compliment to it is in its acute exemplification in 
the scheme of checks and balances which wove its 
way into the fabric of the completed Constitution. 
"The idea of introducing a monarchy or aristo- 
cracy into this country ... is one of those 
visionary things that none but madmen could 
meditate and that no wise man will believe," 
Hamilton wrote upon occasion to Washington.' 
"There is not the slightest evidence, except Mr. 
Jefferson's assertion, that there was a single resident 
in the city at that period, except foreign residents, 
who were any less partial to RepubHcanism than 
himself; certainly General Washington, General 
Knox, Colonel Hamilton, Mr. Adams and Mr. Jay 
. . . never on any occasion whatever breathed or 
wrote a syllable to authorize an imputation against 
them or any of them of a predilection for kingly or 
aristocratic institutions," declares an older his- 

' TJie Works of Alexander Hamilton, edited by Senator 
Henry Cabot Lodge. 

119 



^Ije (Creates!! I^merican 

tory. ' A none-too-friendly modern critic^ adds 
that these charges against Hamilton were "based 
upon garbled reports of his speech and were made 
for political purposes . . . Hamilton had not 
proposed a monarchy. When some of his fellow 
delegates were hesitating through fear of public 
opinion, he expressed himself bravely and unequi- 
vocally for a strong, centralized government that 
should be free from any danger of State interfer- 
ence." Yet so wild did some frenzies upon this 
score ultimately become that for a time extreme 
fanatics believed the lurid tale that Hamilton and 
others had a plot to bring over the second son of 
the British King and make him King of the United 
States. These aspersions — then and in their later 
echo by historians— were just as true as the sub- 
sequent fairy tales that John Adams, when Presi- 
dent, planned inter-marriage with the family of 
George HI. This same spirit of suspicion bitterly 
attacked the organization of the famous Society of 
the Cincinnati, an order to which Revolutionary 
officers and their oldest male heirs were primarily 
eligible, and over which Washington presided with 
Hamilton, as usual, at his right hand. The fallacy 

' Griswold's American Society, 1855. 
^ Prof. Max Farrand in The Framing of The Constitution. 

120 



^fje (Creates;! i^merican 

of this suspicion, ultimately finding its chief oracle 
in Jefferson, may be gauged by modern inquiry 
into the extent to which The Daughters of The 
American Revolution, for example, threaten us 
with a menacing trend toward "hereditary 
nobility," Jefferson's phrase. 

The word "republic" in those days had not ac- 
cumulated its modern honorable meaning. In- 
stead it bespoke the pattern of those turbulent 
mass-decisions which were the bane of Athens and 
Rome. When Hamilton despaired of republican 
government established over so great an area as 
the American States even then embraced, he was 
thinking of the dangers of a pure democracy — 
dangers which always were and always will be 
lethal. It was no lack of allegiance to popular 
government which sent him to the forum to advo- 
cate his alternative plan at Philadelphia. On the 
contrary, it was that sublimity of exalted allegiance 
which dared to challenge a popular obsession for 
the sake of protecting popular government itself. 
More: Hamilton's most imderstanding biographers 
report that he was deliberately proposing an extreme 
for which he had neither expectation nor wish of 
success, for the sake of matching extremes in an 
opposite direction and thus assuring sanity and 

121 



strength and permanence in the ultimate, inevitable 
compromise. Never was there keener sagacity 
or purer motive. His one everlasting aim was a 
Union capable of its own defense and preservation, 
and he achieved his aim. 

The true inwardness of all his purpose is unan- 
swerably demonstrated by the fact that when the 
Convention was done with its historic labors, when 
compromise had been effected upon the Constitu- 
tion under which we still abide, Hamilton, deserted 
by his two States-Rights associates from his home 
Commonwealth, took the solemn, isolated re- 
sponsibility, singly and alone, on the 17th of 
September, of signing the new Covenant of Free- 
dom on behalf of the great State of New York. But 
for him and his flaming cotirage, New York would 
have been absent from that honor roll and if New 
York had been absent, no post-mortem prophet 
dare say what might have been the Constitution's 
and the Union's fate. 

Washington, Hamilton, Madison, Gouverneur 
Morris and James Wilson were the supreme quin- 
tette in this constitutional achievement. Hamil- 
ton, surrounded in his own delegation by the Con- 
stitution's foes, labored assiduously from first to 
last — among the people outside and the delegates 

122 



inside — for the attainment of his traditional ideals; 
and the fact that he would have dictated some con- 
stitutional details otherwise than as finally drafted, 
is lost in the greater contemplation that he won 
his basic aims to an extent best demonstrated by 
the soul-deep conviction with which he proceeded 
to wean a hostile public opinion away from its 
timidity, its prejudices, its hesitancy, its fears. 

The battled for ratification of the Constitution 
by the States now moved swiftly into action. 
There was no blinking the fact that a majority 
of the people were opposed to the new Covenant. 
Politicians who cherished existing perquisites were 
imwilling to trade their easy opportimities for a 
system that promised economical and unexploited 
administration. Leaders who were important in a 
little sovereignty hesitated to compete for prefer- 
ence in wider areas. Each State was jealous alike 
of its neighbors and its own imimpeached au- 
thority. Even the far-flung influence of covetous 
foreign courts was not averse to seeing Union fail. 
But the American alternative was anarchy and 
disintegration, and the sturdy exponents of the 
new faith, tmdaunted by obstacles and unafraid, 
proceeded to the contest. To Hamilton, still but 
a youth of thirty-one, fell the supreme responsi- 

123 



tCJje ^vtnttit i^merican 

bilities, and from him sprang an invincibly com- 
pelling leadership without which the Constitution 
would have failed. 

Hamilton's first great triimiph was in the pub- 
lication of "The Federalist" papers. To this 
erudite work Madison contributed some and Jay 
a little. But in idea and major execution this 
mighty genesis of constitutional literature was of 
and by "The Little Lion." '"The Federalist,'" 
wrote Senator Henry Cabot Lodge in his admirable 
Life of Hamilton, "throughout the length and 
breadth of the United States did more than any- 
thing else that was either written or spoken, to 
secure the adoption of the new scheme." So 
thoroughly true is this, and so superlatively im- 
portant is "The Federalist" even to-day in its 
profound governmental axioms, that a greater 
detail — and corresponding estimate of Hamilton's 
genius in this respect — awaits separate study in a 
chapter hence. 

Now came the acid test. Now arrived the hour 
of Armageddon. Governor Clinton failed to pre- 
vent legislative action calling a New York Con- 
vention to pass upon the question of ratification, 
but in the election of delegates he and his adherent 
captured 46 out of 65 seats, and he, sworn foe to the 

124 



Constitution, was elected to preside. At the head 
of the sturdy, close-knit, desperately determined 
minority was Hamilton, again, as always, in the 
breach. The odds would have overwhelmed 
hearts that were less stout or intentions less sub- 
lime. Nineteen to forty-five! And every man of 
this bitterly partisan Clintonian majority had been 
elected on specific understanding that he would 
oppose the Constitution! Leading them was 
Melancthon Smith, one of the ablest debaters of 
that epoch. Wielding the gavel was the gruff 
Clinton himself, intent upon victory at any price. 
Yet the Federalists, for as such they were now 
known under Hamilton's courageous inspiration, 
faced this coalition with perfect determination ulti- 
mately to overcome the Constitution's foes. No 
fiction ever paralleled such a parliamentary drama. 
No marshal ever deployed his forces against more 
unequal odds. But no cause was ever blessed 
with more intrepidly brilliant, sagacious and re- 
sourceful leadership and no final victory ever paid 
higher testimony to the genius of one man. Herod- 
otus had no more compelling text than this when 
he wrote Leonidas into everlasting history for his 
lonesome exploit in holding the pass at Ther- 
mopylae, nor Lord Macaulay when he immortalized 

125 



®!je ^xtattsii American 

Horatius At The Bridge in his celebrated ''Lays 
of Ancient Rome." 

New York was neither the richest nor the most 
populous of the States. But it was pivotal, mid- 
way from north to south. Without it, the Con- 
stitution, even though ratified by the required 
nine states necessary to validation, would have 
been a precarious adventure. Without it, effec- 
tive Union would have been impossible. With it, 
almost any eventuality was safe. The destiny of a 
new world and an uplifted civilization hung 
largely upon Hamilton: nor did it lean upon a 
broken reed. Such was the precarious situation 
when this New York Convention gathered on 
Jime 17, 1788. Delaware, New Jersey and Georgia 
had already ratified the new Constitution unani- 
mously; Pennsylvania, by a vote of 46 to 23; 
Connecticut, by a vote of 128 to 40; Massachu- 
setts, by a vote of 187 to 168; Maryland, by a vote 
of 63 to 12; and South Carolina, by a vote of 149 to 
73. A ninth ratification and the thing was done! 
But unless that ninth or a subsequent ratification 
was pivotal New York's, the thing was done in 
vain. 

The followers of Clinton urged delay. Hamilton 
met this issue boldly and won his first advantage 

126 



^l)t ^vmttit American 

in a vote which at least disclosed justification for 
belief that fair-play might hope for ultimate 
chance. Then he settled to his long and arduous 
task of beating down his opposition by sheer weight 
of logic, charm of aphoristic eloquence and daunt- 
less perseverance in the right. Never once in the 
gruelling grind did he yield faith or purpose. 
Asked by a friend for a message to take back from 
Poughkeepsie to New York regarding prospects 
for the Constitutional ratification, Hamilton re- 
plied : "God only knows. Several votes have been 
taken by which it appears that there are two to 
one against us. But tell them that the Convention 
shall never rise until the Constitution is adopted." 
And it never did ! 

The news that New Hampshire had ratified the 
Constitution on June 21, by a vote of 57 to 46, was 
rushed to Hamilton by courier. Nine states had 
now acted. The Constitution, by its own terms, 
was now in effect. Only the greater became the 
responsibility upon New York if it should refuse 
acquiescence upon which the fate of the whole 
gigantic experiment undoubtedly hung. By the 
same token the greater became the responsibility 
upon Hamilton. For days at a time he pressed 
home his lucid, luminous appeals. Every phase 

127 



TOe ^vtattit American 

of the new code was submitted to that perfection 
of compeUing analysis of which he was and is 
America's prime master. Another courier tore 
into town with the news that Virginia, by a vote of 
89 to 79 on June 25, had joined the new United 
States. The CHntonians, worn to desperation by 
the futiHty of attempting to escape Hamilton's 
artillery of argument, felt their weakening strength. 
They were finding it less and less possible to face 
Hamilton's embattled words. But they were 
stubborn in their turgid prejudices and passion. 
They tried the expedient of adjournment and were 
defeated. They tried amendments. They tried 
conditional ratification. It was all to no avail. 
Hamilton had convinced a sector of his adversaries 
against their will and their pre-election pledges. 
It is doubtful whether the world's history of 
polemics can produce a parallel in extent of ora- 
tory's directly proven power. With consummate 
skill, he had molded the hearts and consciences of 
hostile critics to the standards he professed. As 
one imderstanding historian has summed it up in 
more recent years: it was "the dramatic spectacle 
of a * visionary yoimg man ' struggling against the 
disciplme of overwhelming odds, day after day for 
six weary weeks, and in the end overcoming all 

128 



opposition by the prowess of a great character 
strung to its highest pitch by the inspiration of a 
great idea."' As for an exposition of the federal 
theory of Union, its Constitutional evolution and 
the authority of an indissoluble United States, the 
debates between Hamilton and Smith deserve to 
rank, in this and every other historical respect, 
with the later passages between Webster and 
Hayne, and between Lincoln and Douglas. 

Melancthon Smith, the leader against whom 
Hamilton had led his hosts, finally admitted that 
he was driven to agree with the position of his 
adversary and that he would vote for ratification. 
Then and there the backbone of Union's opposi- 
tion broke. The Convention which in the begin- 
ning had stood 45 to 19 against the Hamiltonian 
code, voted on July 26, 1 788, 30 to 28 in favor of rati- 
fication. Not through manipulation or devious 
politics had this reversal come. It was a tribute 
to the commanding genius of the greatest friend 
the American Constitution ever had. The dream 
which Hamilton, a college youth, had disclosed at 
"The Meeting in The Fields" in New York City, 
July 6, 1774, was a dream no more. The United 
States was" become the powerful, federalized entity 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 
g 129 



tirije ^xtattsit i^merican 

which he had besought with ceaseless anxiety 
through fourteen fertile years. Small wonder that 
New York City welcomed him with a noisy festival 
of acclamatory joy; and that in the great pageant 
which celebrated the occasion, the Federal Frigate 
bore the magic letters H-A-M-I-L-T-O-N em- 
blazoned on every side of it. Washington's com- 
paratively silent but impressive influence, always 
commending the Constitution to the people, was a 
mighty factor in its creation and acceptance. 
Madison and many another patriot rendered yeo- 
man service in this indescribably great crisis in the 
tides of men. But the greatest single service of all 
was rendered by this brilliant youth in whose blood 
was the hot enthusiasm of the tropics, in whose 
heart was a love of America of sublimest purity, 
and in whose encyclopedic head was a dynamo of 
intellect which was tireless in its courageous devotion 
to the common weal. Meanwhile, as a bi-product, 
through the fraternity of battle Hamilton had 
founded and galvanized the first great political 
party in the United States by the force of his ideals 
and the urge of his leadership. This party bor- 
rowed its name from Hamilton's "Federalist" 
which had expounded its creeds and charted its 
undertakings. It was dedicated to Union. It 

130 



Cfje i^rcatejst American 

never ceased to stand watch over its sovereign 
aims, just as it never ceased to acknowledge 
Hamilton as its inspiration and its oracle. 

In all Hamilton's subsequent works, when he 
became the dominant spirit in President Washing- 
ton's two administrations, like the later Lincoln 
he never ceased to make the advancement and the 
security of Union his paramount concern. It was 
the passion of his life. His first Treasury Report, 
upon the subject of public credit, emphasized his 
basic purpose to solve the new government's finan- 
cial problems so as best "to cement more closely 
the Union of the States." His National Bank 
was intended even more to typify and solidify the 
central, federalized authority of Union than to 
fimction as a financial entity, important though 
the latter aim was. His defense of his National 
Bank device, establishing the comprehensive doc- 
trine of "implied powers" granted to the Govern- 
ment by the Constitution, did more to clothe 
Union with the capacities for self-preservation 
than any other single act of any other single states- 
man. We shall never outlive the precognition 
which he thus displayed as an unflinching pioneer 
in daring to insist that the Constitution must be 
liberally construed. 

131 



^f)t (Creates;! American 

He was still thinking and planning continent- 
ally, he was still The Master Builder of effective 
Union, when he argued the good of the whole 
country against any section thereof, in his sapient 
"Report on Manufacturers" in which he set down 
bases upon which the country ultimately was to 
develop economically and industrially; still think- 
ing and planning to cement the indestructible 
foundations of one inseparable nation when he 
forced the assumption of State war debts by the 
federal Government. He was still fighting for 
federal dominion when he leaped into resistless ac- 
tion against anarchy and sectional impudence in 
western Pennsylvania and crushed the "Whiskey 
Rebellion" which challenged the authority and 
power of Union to control its sectors, preserve its 
sovereignty and compel allegiance. He was look- 
ing ahead to the achievement of a matured Union 
which should be physically safe-guarded against 
border-cramps when he, first among Americans, 
planned the acquisition of Louisiana and the 
Floridas. Always and forever his passion was to 
promote self-reliant nationalism. "We are labor- 
ing hard to establish in this country principles more 
and more national, and free from all foreign in- 
gredients, so that we may be neither 'Greek nor 

132 



W\)t ^vtattsit American 

Trojans,' but truly Americans," he wrote to Rufus 
King on December i6, 1796. The first clarion 
call against hyphenated citizenship! The Roose- 
veltism of the eighteenth century and the founda- 
tion ! Always and forever he was vigilant in quick 
contest against any prophecy of national disin- 
tegration. Thus it was that Jefferson's "Ken- 
tucky Resolutions," proposing that a State might 
invade and supersede federal jurisdiction in Con- 
stitutional interpretations, brought him with all 
his relentless zeal into a brilliant offensive against 
a brutally frank declaration of the right inherent 
in a State to secede at will. 

In all his iron hostility to any American imita- 
tion of the theories which the French Revolution 
came to visualize he v/as inspired by this major 
motif of his life, his love of orderly, independent 
American Government imder the Constitution 
through the vehicle of Union. Every atom of his 
being revolted against the excesses which sunk 
France in blood and his constant fear was that 
this spirit of abandoned respect for established in- 
stitutions might commimicate itself to the United 
States and threaten the Constitutional structure 
to the erection of which he had given his life. "I 
trust there is enough of virtue and good sense m 

133 



VJ^i^t ^vtattat American 

the people of America to baffle every attempt 
against their prosperity, though masked under 
the specious garb of an extraordinary zeal for 
liberty," he wrote a friend. Again: "In a great 
government framed for durable liberty, not less 
regard must be paid to giving the magistrate a 
proper degree of authority to make and execute 
the laws with rigor than to guard against en- 
croachments upon the rights of the community; as 
too much power leads to despotism, too httle leads 
to anarchy, and both eventually to the ruin of the 
people." Contemplating massacres in Paris and 
the ascendant of Marat and Robespierre, he wrote: 
"When I perceive passion, timiult and violence 
Usurping those seats where reason and cool de- 
liberation ought to prevail, I acknowledge that I 
am glad to believe there is no real resemblance 
between what was the cause of America and what is 
the cause of France; that the difference is no less 
great than that between liberty and licentious- 
ness." It was his deathless devotion to the new 
American system which inspired this constant 
posture throughout the critical months when the 
epidemics of French Jacobinism threatened to com- 
municate themselves to the young and impression- 
able United States. He was neither hostile to 

134 



Wf)t (Creates;! American 

France as a nation, nor unduly inclined toward 
England as was constantly charged. Simply he 
was passionately pro-American, pro-Union and 
pro-Constitution. He sought to save these ideals 
from any foreign involvements. Without him, 
our independence of these entanglements might 
have run a short and fatal course. In all his poli- 
cies this purpose was his riiling inspiration. "It 
is more and more evident," he wrote to Washing- 
ton in 1798, "that the powerful faction which has 
for years opposed the Government is determined 
to go every length with France. I am sincere in 
declaring my full conviction, as the result of a long 
course of observation, that they are ready to new- 
model our Constitution imder the influence or 
coercion of France. . . . This would be in sub- 
stance, whatever it might be in name, to make this 
country a province of France." Against all such 
tendencies he was a perpetually vigilant warrior, 
always the first to scent menace, always the first 
to enlist against it. Against the emasculated de- 
mocracy that is communism he was everlastingly at 
war. Thus he did not hesitate to favor the famous 
Alien and Sedition Acts, in Adams' day, which 
sought to clothe the Government with greater 
power to fight this curse. Yet he was always as 

135 



tBf)t ^xtattit ilmerican 

jealous of liberty as he was zealous against license. 
He sought modifications in the Alien Act, saying: 
"Let us not be cruel or violent." Again: "Let 
us not establish a tyranny ; energy is a very differ- 
ent thing from violence." In other words, though 
ready for any expedients seemingly essential unto 
safe-guarding of Government and Union under 
the Constitution, he was still the judicially fair- 
minded statesman always. But the paramount 
consideration, regardless of cost or consequence, 
was Government and Union imder an unimpeached 
and imimpeachable Constitution. 

Only at rare intervals did his dauntless heart 
stirrender to cynicism. In one such mood he 
wrote bitterly to Gouvemeur Morris on February 
27,1802. "Mineis an odd destiny," said he. "Per- 
haps no man in the United States has sacrificed or 
done more for the present Constitution than myself. 
... I am still laboring to prop the frail and 
worthless fabric. Yet I have the murmurs of its 
friends no less than the curses of its foes for my 
reward. . . The time may ere long arrive when 
the minds of men will be prepared to make an effort 
to recover the Constitution, but the many cannot 
now be brought to make a stand for its preserva- 
tion. We must wait awhile." He felt that the 

136 



^f)t ^xtattit American 

Federalists had been driven from power, in the 
elections of 1800, by a demagogy which assidu- 
ously pandered to the passions and the vanities 
and all the imreasoning prejudices of men ; and he 
feared that such tendencies would lead to disin- 
tegration of federal authority and dissolution of 
the Union's institutions. But a few weeks later, 
typically dauntless, he was sturdily girding himself 
for the continued battle, with customary vigor and 
constructive plan of action. "In my opinion," he 
wrote, "the present Constitution is the standard to 
which we are to cling. Under its banners bona 
fide we must combat our political foes, rejecting all 
changes but through the channel itself provides for 
amendments." Thereupon he outlined his pro- 
posal that a protective association be formed to be 
denominated "The Christian Constitutional So- 
ciety, its objects to be, first, "the support of the 
Christian religion, second, the support of the 
Constitution of the United States." That he thus 
should have hnked these two purposes and philoso- 
phies reflects his belief that atheism was the hand- 
maiden to anarchy in France and that similar red 
relationship was to be feared in the United States. 
Down to the day of his death, literally, he per- 
sisted in his warnings that American and Union and 

137 



t!Df)e (^reatejst l^merican 

Constitutional institutions might be saved. On 
July 10, 1804, the day preceding his assassination, 
he wrote that "Dismemberment of our empire 
will be a clear sacrifice of great, positive advantages 
without any coimterbalancing good, administering 
no relief to our real disease, which is democracy, the 
poison of which by subdivision will only be the 
more concentrated in each part and consequently 
the more virulent." He was not using the word 
democracy in the sense which we now understand. 
He used it rather with an application which feared 
ultimate graduation into what the modern day 
would more accurately brand as Bolshevism. 
Against all such destruction of the established 
constitutional institutions of Union he was the 
great, original American crusader. Indeed, Sena- 
tor Lodge, in his admirable analysis of Hamilton's 
conscience, argues that it was this idea, amounting 
to no less than an obsession, which caused him to 
accept Burr's challenge to a duel instead of scorn- 
ing such an unenlightened recourse.' He felt 
that the time was coming when Americans who 
believed in law and order and Union would be 
forced into open combat with anarchy and 
dissolution. He believed that leadership in 
' Lodge's Life of Hamilton. 

138 



^fjE ^ttattit American 

such a conflict, when it came, would be his 
necessary r61e and "he could not do this, he 
could not stand at the head of an army, if it 
were possible for any man to cast even the most 
groimdless imputation upon his personal courage." 
On the other hand, if he were killed in such personal 
contact with the most thoroughly outstanding 
anti- American of the time, the shock would jar his 
coimtry into a more initmate and responsive 
appreciation of its dangers. 

Hamilton himself pronounced much this same 
benediction upon this final scene in his tremendous 
life drama. At the end of a remarkable statement 
which he penned the night before the fatal duel, 
he gave his reason for meeting Burr in these words: 
"The ability to be in future useful, whether in 
resisting mischief or effecting good, in those crises 
of our public affairs which seem likely to happen, 
would probably be inseparable from a conformity 
with public prejudice in this particular." 

Unquestionably Hamilton died in the service of 
his country just as truly as though he had been 
killed at Yorktown. Measured by Hamilton's 
rugged standard of patriotic fidelities, Burr was 
guilty of treason to every tenet of true liberty and 
perpetuated Union and conserved American wel- 

139 



^fje (Creates;! American 

fare. So he fought Burr relentlessly in each suc- 
cessive step of his minatory career. In the final 
chapter Burr represented northern secession built 
around the New England Separatist movement. 
To the defeat of any such dissolution no man can 
doubt that Hamilton cheerfully would have given 
his life upon the field of battle. Having shunned 
no danger or responsibility in the long processes of 
Union evolution, he would have shirked no obliga- 
tion in the chmax. In such circumstance his very 
soul was at the judgment bar. Therefore, when 
the tricks of fate brought him face to face, upon 
the field of honor, with the most formidable and 
conspicuous type of a class of men whose ambitions 
if unchecked must, in his judgment, have led to the 
ruin of the state ' he went as to battle for his beloved 
Union when he consented to the duel with Burr. 
He knew, tragically well, the personal risks because 
his eldest son, Philip, had already been killed in a 
similar quarrel. Burr, furthermore, was a veteran 
duellist, though never heretofore with a fatality 
charged against his pistol aim. But for Hamilton 
it was a nation's war reduced to simplest terms and 
smallest sacrifice which he was to fight. To him 
the personal eventuality was a matter of small 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

140 



t^fje (Greatest American 

moment. If he was not killed, he would at least 
have fore-closed his adversaries from invidious 
disparagement of a spotless courage in subsequent 
conflicts. If he was killed, he knew that the 
national re-action against his enemies and his 
faiths would speak with an eloquence even greater 
than his own. My personal opinion is that he 
believed the latter course would be of compara- 
tively greater service. Certainly such was the 
event. As for the morally bankrupt Burr, his 
subsequent abortive efforts to erect a south- 
western empire and his later trial for treason prove 
perfectly how prescient was Hamilton in sensing 
this high source of danger to the great institutions 
of American Union to which he dedicated his life. 

John Quincy Adams, perhaps with inherited 
venom, has tried to construe Hamilton's motive 
for fighting Burr as ambition. But Professor Sum- 
ner's biographical study of Hamilton truthfully 
says : * * If a man fights that he may not lose a chance 
to serve his country in crises which he foresees, it 
is not self-evident that his motive is ambition. 
. . . He may be sacrificing his conscientious 
opinions to the highest patriotism, not to ambition." 
Such certainly is the correct historical verdict upon 
this greatest American loyalist who was no less a 

141 



tKJje (^reatesft American 

martyr to the tyranny of traitors than were Lin- 
coln and Garfield and McKinley in a later mourn- 
ing day. Further, just as sure as Lincoln was a 
sacrifice to Union, so was Alexander Hamilton. 
The bullet that took each was aimed equally at 
Columbia's heart. 

The great historian, George Ticknor Curtis, has 
said of Hamilton: "He was the first to perceive 
and develop the idea of a real Union of the people 
of the United States."' The whole truth is that 
he was the Master Builder of American Union. 

* History of the Constitution of the United States, by George 
Ticknor Curtis. 



142 



aCfje jFeberalisJt 

"The Federalist" was the name given to a 
series of eighty -five articles appearing in New York 
publications during the months when the Constitu- 
tion hung in the balances. "Together they form 
one of the great classics of Government," Dr. 
Charles W. Eliot has declared, prefacing their notice 
in the Harvard Classics. Not only is this true, but 
far higher praise might well be their due without 
exaggeration. In clarity of logic, force of appeal, 
projection of vision and wisdom of advice they 
come down through the decades with a living mes- 
sage which in many respects is not second even to 
Washington's Farewell Address in wisdom and 
homily. Their influence at the time of publica- 
tion cannot be over-estimated. They were the 
torch that lighted the dark and sorely beset paths 
of that minority of New York's citizenship which 
believed in the new Republic. They were charts 
of reassurance to the new Constitution's friends; 
unanswerable indictments to its foes. They were 

143 



tE^fje (Greatest ^mtvitan 

as daring as they were sound. Without them, cer- 
tainly without their dominating author, New York 
would have rejected the Constitution. New York's 
rejection would have broken the Union ere it v/as 
launched. 

All of these essays were addressed "to the people 
of the State of New York." They appeared in 
The Independent Journal, The Packet, The Daily 
Advertiser, and in McLean's Edition, from the 
autumn of 1787 to the spring of 1788. All of them 
bore one simple signature — "Publius." But their 
true source of authorship is undisguised. John 
Jay wrote five. James Madison wrote fourteen. 
Hamilton and Madison probably collaborated on 
three. The source of twelve are in doubt as to 
whether born of Hamilton or Madison. But fifty- 
one, comprising far the major portion and the 
major motif, are the acknowledged product of 
Hamilton's incandescent pen. 

Neither Hamilton nor Madison were entirely 
satisfied with the Constitution in all its particu- 
lars. They had stressed different views in the 
Convention from which this mighty document 
originally came. But when once the Convention 
had agreed upon its plan and reported its consoli- 
dated structure to the country, both Hamilton 

144 



tK^fje ^vtattit ^mcrtcan 

and Madison buried all faction and swung stal- 
wartly to the paramount necessity of securing 
ratification. The Federalist was Hamilton's idea. 
In conception and execution it was essentially his. 
Never did advocacy rise to greater heights. Never 
was higher service rendered to an uncertain people. 

To sketch the structure which Hamilton reared 
in these papers is to reflect the fundaments of the 
United States. To examine, in epitome, his creed 
is a valuable digression not alone for its testimony 
to Hamilton's stature, but also for its admonition 
to the people of a modern day in which Constitu- 
tional fidelities are none too strong at best. 

In the first appearance of The Federalist, Ham- 
ilton set down this motivating question: "Are 
societies of men capable of establishing good gov- 
ernment from reflection and choice or are they 
forever destined to depend for their political con- 
stitutions on accident and force?" He pitched 
his appeal upon planes involving the higher sensi- 
bilities. He brushed aside all ascription of sordid 
motives to his opponents and condemned them 
only of "the honest errors of minds led astray by 
preconceived jealousies and fears." This toleration 
which he granted, and never forsook except in 
those few chapters wherein he lashed the pretense 

145 



tKfie ^vtattit ilmerican 

of a parallel between Presidents and Kings, he 
besought from hi s opponen ts . " We are not always 
sure," said he, "that those who advocate the truth 
are influenced by purer principles than their 
antagonists. In politics, as in religion, it is equally 
absurd to aim at making proselytes by fire and 
sword. Heresies in either can rarely be cured by 
persecution." 

Yet, with subtle fling, he stripped the demagog 
and laid him bare. "A dangerous ambition more 
often lurks behind the specious mask of zeal for the 
rights of the people than under the forbidding ap- 
pearance of zeal for the firmness and efficiency of 
Government. Of those men who have overttirned 
the liberties of Republics, the greatest number 
have begun their careers by paying an obsequious 
court to the people; commencing demagogs, and 
ending tyrants." How true this philosophy was 
and is can be demonstrated, yesterday and today, 
by consulting the most casual historical reminiscence 
and contemporary experience. 

In the sixth Federalist, Hamilton began to build 
the structure of his argument. In that day, as in 
this, theory and practice were at constant odds. 
The first task undertaken was to persuade the 
idealists, who refused to consent that prospects of 

146 



^fje (Greatest American 

menace surrounded the loose but liberated colonies, 
that "Utopian speculations" were a dangerous 
dream. (The faithful chronicler must concede a 
striking parallel between this argument and the 
declaration of Senator Henry Cabot Lodge 122 
years later, opening his argument against the 
Versailles Covenant; "Unshared ideahsm is a 
menace".) To anticipate no frictions and no need 
to guard against them, argued Hamilton, was "to 
disregard the uniform course of human events and 
to set at defiance the accumulated experience of 
ages." He sounded reveille from "the deceitful 
dream of a golden age." He pleaded the neces- 
ity "to adopt as a practical maxim for the direction 
of our political conduct that we, as well as the 
other inhabitants of the globe, are yet remote from 
the happy empire of perfect wisdom and perfect 
virtue." He challenged "visionary or designing 
men who stand ready to advocate the paradox of 
perpetual peace." 

The whole purpose in this and three subsequent 
issues of The Federalist was to emphasize the 
intensely practical need of a " Conf ederative 
Republic" (fruit of the Constitution) which could 
serve as a defense against aggression from abroad, 
and, at home, against "secret jealousy which 

147 



Wiit ^xtatt^i American 

disposes all states to aggrandize themselves at the 
expense of their neighbors." 

Hamilton sketched the sources of war and 
showed how small a friction can pyramid into a 
casus belli; how comparatively inconsequential 
an agency — the bigotry of a de Main tenon, the 
petulance of a Marlborough, the cabals of a 
de Pompadour — may graduate into embattled 
disaster. He showed that Republics — Sparta, 
Athens, Rome, Carthage — are as susceptible to 
war as monarchies. In all these references, he 
disclosed his marvelous grasp upon the details of 
history. Indeed, diverging for a moment it must 
be said that in this complete Federalist exhibit, 
Hamilton displayed a working scholarship of rare 
extent. The Achaean League, the Belgic Con- 
federacy, the Protestant Alliance of Berne, the 
Catholic Alliance of Luzerne, the League of Cam- 
bray, the Lycian Confederacy, the Polish Diet, 
the Union of Utrecht were handy references. The 
^tolians, the Cosmi, the Lacedaemonians, the 
Samnians, the Phocians — all paraded Federalist 
pages in their proper place. Draco, Pericles, 
Grotius, Scipio, Plutarch, Plato, Callicrates, Solon, 
Lycurgus, Socrates, Theseus, Xerxes — all occupied 
their potential station. The Treaty of Hanover, 

148 



the Treaty of Westphalia, the Treaty of Savoy, 
were all familiar incidents. In a word, knowledge 
was never greater power than in the possession of 
this master. 

He was arguing the strength of Union as a com- 
mon defense at home and abroad. He pleaded that 
the result of a loose confederacy would be gradually 
"to entangle America in all the pernicious laby- 
rinths of European politics and wars." On the 
other hand, said he: "If we are wise enough to 
preserve the Union, we may for ages enjoy an ad- 
vantage similar to that of an insulated situation. 
Europe is at a great distance from us. Her col- 
onies in our vicinity will likely continue too much 
disproportioned in strength to be able to give us 
any dangerous annoyance." The alternative he 
pictured was foreign intrigue encouraged by a 
divided America, each independent sector of which 
would be too weak and too jealous of its neighbors 
to resist the temptation of seeking selfish advan- 
tage through alien alliance. This same division, 
inviting trouble abroad, he argued, would en- 
courage "the vices of constant domestic faction 
and insurrection at home." Against "an infinity 
of little, jealous, clashing, tumultuous common- 
wealths, the wretched nurseries of unceasing dis- 

149 



tKfje (Creates;! American 

cord," he flung the whole force of his compelling 
logic. 

Here was sounded the great plea for Union — 
the first tremendous, consecutive argimient for 
American solidarity. He was the greatest pioneer 
advocate of Union, speaking as Lincoln did seven 
decades later, and clothing his allegiance in an 
equally uncompromising fealty. From beginning 
to end, The Federalist set down the charts which 
must have been Lincoln's constant encouragement 
and reference and bulwark when the second test of 
the Union came. Though it be a confessed an- 
achronism, Hamilton was the Lincoln of his times — 
the first Lincoln in the story of the United States. 

"Let the thirteen states," he wrote in the 
eleventh Federalist, "bound together in a strict 
and indissoluble Union, concur in erecting one 
great American system, superior to the control of all 
trans- Atlantic force or influence." These sepa- 
rate State organizations, he declared, must be " w 
perfect subordination to the general authority of 
the Union." He charged that his adversaries 
"aim at things repugnant and irreconcilable — at 
an augmentation of federal authority without a 
diminution of state authority — at sovereignty in 
the Union, and complete independence in the mem - 

150 



^f)t (greatesit American 

bers." He hurled the whole might of his attack 
against this fallacy. It was a case of choice, he 
pointed out in the fifteenth Federalist, between a 
mere alliance or "adherence to the design of a 
national government." 

He insisted that the Constitution's enemies be- 
sought a type of Union in which the central govern- 
ment has no authority over the persons of its 
citizens who are answerable only to the sovereignty 
of their states. He insisted that such a loose con- 
federation was comparable with "feudal baronies." 
He insisted upon putting the Union above the 
individual State and prophesied — how wisely his- 
tory tmhappily recorded later — that any other 
scheme of things would invite a grouping of 
secessional states bent upon war and "the dis- 
solution of the Union." He demanded an indis- 
putable central power "to exact obedience" and 
to punish disobedience and to "secure a sanc- 
tion to its laws." He answered the "virulent 
invective" and "petulant declamation" aimed 
at the Constitution's express provision, declaring 
it and the laws and the treaties made in pursu- 
ance thereof, "the supreme law of the land, 
anything in the constitution or laws of any state 
to the contrary notwithstanding." With cool 

151 



logic, in the thirty-third Federalist, he demon- 
strated the essential imphcation of this authority 
even though not expressed, and added, propheti- 
cally: "the Convention probably foresaw that the 
danger which most threatens our political welfare 
is that state governments will finally sap the 
foundations of the Union, and thought it neces- 
sary, in so cardinal a point, to leave nothing to 
construction." 

From the beginning to the end. The Federalist 
rings with this apostrophe to Union. Lincoln, in a 
later age, became the great, outstanding exponent 
whom modern opinion exalts as the greatest advo- 
cate that Union ever had. He wrote, he preached, 
he served wonderfully to this tremendous end and 
no acknowledgment of debt to him, on this ac- 
count, can be too great. It is no detraction from 
his stature to raise another advocate of Union by 
his side. It is merely the just verdict of history to 
say that the Hamilton crusades of 1787-88 did, in 
the creation, what the Lincoln crusades of 1860-65 
did in the preservation — each a noble, daring, 
immortal service inexorably prosecuted against 
tremendous odds. 

In the earlier Federahsts, Hamilton sought to 
impress his countrymen with the idea that a solid 

152 



federation would relieve them of excessive burdens 
by way of supporting armies since it would obviate 
standing defenses by one state or one group of 
states against others. But he took good care that 
these observations should not encourage a belief 
that the new Union itself could stand defenseless. 
In terms of modern application, he believed in 
"preparedness." In terms of modern application 
fully as pertinently as of that day, he presciently 
bespoke a nation's common sense necessities in 
1780, in 1920 or in any year to come. "Let us 
recollect," said he, in the thirty-fourth Federalist, 
"that peace or war will not always be left to our 
option ; that however moderate or unambitious we 
may be, we cannot count upon the moderation or 
hope to extinguish the ambitions of others." 
Arguing for an adequate Navy as well as an Army, 
he declared: "Even the rights of neutrality will 
only be respected when they are defended by an 
adequate power. A nation, despicable by its 
weakness, forfeits even the privilege of being 
neutral." His wisdom bridged a century and more 
to be vindicated by the experiences of his beloved 
United States in the throes of World War. Theo- 
dore Roosevelt, the late Augustus Gardner and 
Major-General Leonard Wood were but fighting 

153 



Hamilton's battles over again — preserving Hamil- 
ton's advice and warnings in renaissance — when 
they sought to arouse America from pacifism. 
Another anachronism: but in respect to this issue, 
Hamilton was the Roosevelt of his time. "The 
hope of impunity," he declared in the twenty- 
seventh Federalist, "is a strong incitement to 
sedition; the dread of punishment a proportion- 
ately strong discouragement to it." Then, a 
chapter later with cutting phrase he ridiculed the 
pacifism of those early days — "the reveries of those 
political doctors whose sagacity disdains the ad- 
monitions of experimental instruction" and 
practical experience. 

This was not militarism for which he contended. 
It was, on the contrary, a specific argument for 
defense of a democratic character. He believed 
in democracy's dependence upon mass-democracy, 
upon a trained citizen reserve, for its defense. 
"Modern circumstances," said he, "have rendered 
disciplined armies, distinct from the body of the 
citizens, the inseparable companions of frequent 
hostility." But this insight into the truth of rela- 
tive defense values did not blind him to practical 
necessities. A standing army in time of peace — 
"small but no less real because it is small" — was 

154 



acknowledged indispensable; and Hamilton liter- 
ally riddled the complaints of those who cringed 
before the proposed Constitution's provisions upon 
this score. Politely, but perfectly, in the twenty- 
fourth Federalist, he exploded the hostile arguments 
of those whose course "is dictated either by a de- 
liberate intention to deceive or by the over-flowings 
of a zeal too intemperate to be ingenuous." His 
insistence was that the Constitution did and must 
give the central government power to defend as well 
as the responsibility for defending common federal 
interests. That this power, under the Constitu- 
tion, could become a menace, he strenuously 
denied. He pointed out, on the other side of this 
argument, that the Constitution gave Congress 
exclusive power over appropriations for the Army, 
required the exercise of this authority every two 
years, and thug forced a biennial review of the na- 
tion's military policy. He argued that a national 
control of the Army was safer than State control 
over numerous armies, because State control would 
be unchecked whereas the States will always be 
jealous of this national power and the people, 
therefore, will stand constant guard against its 
misuse. ''The people are always most in danger," 
he wrote, in the twenty -fifth Federalist, "when the 

155 



tlTfte ([^reatesit American 

means of injuring their rights are in the possession of 
those of whom they entertain the least suspicion." 
Was ever terser philosophy put into trite epigram? 
Then, in a climax of crushing logic, he disclosed the 
absurdity of failing to provide an adequate, com- 
mon, imified, federal defense. He showed that 
the necessity for such defense would inevitably 
arise and that when it did, public necessity would 
always find a way to accomplish its exigent require- 
ments, regardless of "parchment barriers" which 
the fearful might undertake to erect constitution- 
ally. This brought him to one of the profoimdest 
of his gems of wisdom — a rule of conduct which 
might well, in this later century, be blazed across 
the theater of every legislative body in the land. 
"Wise politicians will be cautious about fettering 
the government with restrictions that canno': be 
observed, because they know that every breach of 
the fimdamental laws, though dictated by neces- 
sity, impairs that sacred reverence which ought to 
be maintained in the breasts of rulers towards the 
Constitution of a country, and forms a precedent 
for other breaches where the same plea of necessity 
does not exist at all, or is less urgent and palpable." 
With the same painstaking care "Publius" dis- 
cussed America's economic situation. He ar- 

156 



Wbt ^vtatt&t iSmerican 

raigned existing colonial conditions wherein no 
factor of "poverty, disorder and insignificance" 
is absent from "the dark catalogue of our public 
misfortunes." To contemplate this picture in its 
verity is to gain a new appreciation of the extent 
of task for which the founders of our Constitu- 
tional government were responsible — a greater task, 
involving greater native obstacles and discourage- 
ments, than has confronted America in any subse- 
quent era, desperate and trying though subsequent 
crises proved to be. 

Hamilton demanded an American merchant 
marine so that we might enjoy "active commerce 
in our own bottoms"; and he argued, in these 
trade concerns, that the power of unity, provided 
through the Constitution, alone could "enable us 
to bargain with great advantage for commercial 
privileges." "We may hope ere long," he wrote 
in one of his typical flashes of foresight, "to become 
the arbiter of Eiurope in America, and to be able 
to incline the balance of European competitions in 
this part of the world as our interest may dictate." 

He argued the economy in cost of government 
which a consolidated nation would permit. His 
opposition was proposing three confederacies in- 
stead of one. The most favored opposition plan 

157 



tE^fje ^xtattat American 

was a grouping of the four northern states, the 
four middle states and the five southern states into 
separate Unions. He demonstrated that the struc- 
ture of federal government for any one of these 
smaller Unions would be practically as great and 
as expensive as one government for all. 

He insisted upon the acceptance of a federal 
taxation authority. "A government ought to 
contain in itself," he wrote in the thirty-first 
Federalist, "every power requisite to the full 
accomplishment of the objects committed to its 
care and to the complete execution of the trusts for 
which it is responsible, free from every other con- 
trol but a regard to the public good and to the 
sense of the people." Again, in the thirty-sixth 
Federalist: "As I know nothing to exempt this por- 
tion of the globe from the common calamities that 
have befallen other parts of it, I acknowledge my 
aversion to every project that is calculated to dis- 
arm the government of a single weapon, which in 
any possible contingency might be usefully 
employed for the general defense and security." 

The forty-ninth to the fifty-eighth Federalists 
inclusive are attributed to an unfixed authorship — 
either Hamilton or Madison. Some sections, 
however, are so masterfully clear and convincing 

158 



^i)t ^vtattit American 

as to recall the genius of Hamilton as disclosed in 
the other papers of which he is the admitted source. 
After arguing the Constitution's wisdom in holding 
each of the three independent branches of the 
government in legitimate check, these particular 
papers devote themselves to a defense of the struc- 
ture proposed for the House of Representatives. 
The advisability of a two-year tenure argued against 
the prejudice of the times which largely favored 
one-year terms consonant with the practice in 
existing state legislatures. (An idiom of the day 
declared that ' ' where annual elections end, tyranny 
begins. ' ') The census basis for apportioning repre- 
sentatives — with slaves counted as persons — was 
defended with a zeal, a humanity and a logic which 
prophetically insisted that these negroes were not 
"property" alone but partook of human attributes 
and station. 

Discussions as to the number of Representatives 
in Congress, originally fixed as sixty-five, are particu- 
larly potent in the light of later-day developments 
upon this score. The popular fear then was that 
the House would be too small and "Pubhus" was 
put to the necessity of proving that its size would 
inevitably increase with succeeding decades, pursu- 
ant to new census counts. But against a too rapid 

159 



^fje <§reates;t American 

stride in this direction, The Federalist dared to 
raise a voice which should be heeded in these modem 
times since our modern problem has swung to this 
opposite extreme. Just as Hamilton promised, the 
size of the House has increased with every decen- 
nial reapportionment with the exception of 1840. 
Though the unit of representation has jimiped 
from 30,000 at the time of the Constitution's adop- 
tion to 211,877 ill 1910, the size of the House has 
jumped from 65 to 435 members. (A century and 
a quarter ago Hamilton wrote of the day when 400 
members might sit in the lower Congress !) We are 
once more in this same process in 1921. We pri- 
vately confess an opinion that we are sacrificing 
efficiency to size, but we publicly continue to 
pursue the course of least resistance. These words 
from The Federalist — wise in their day, even wiser 
in their prophecy — should be read on the floor of 
Congress upon every f utiu'e decennial occasion of a 
reappointment : 

"The truth is, that in all cases a certain nimiber 
(of Representatives) at least seems necessary to 
secure the benefits of free consultation and dis- 
cussion, and to guard against too easy a combina- 
tion for improper purposes; as, on the other hand, 
the number ought at most to be kept within a cer- 

160 



^fje (Greatest !3merican 

tain limit, in order to avoid the confusion and in- 
temperance of a multitude. In all very numerous 
assemblies, of whatever character composed, pas- 
sion never fails to wrest the scepter from reason. 
... In all legislative assemblies the greater the 
number composing them may be, the fewer will be 
the men who will in fact direct their proceedings. 
In the first place, the more numerous an assembly 
may be, of whatever character composed, the 
greater is known to be the ascendancy of passion 
over reason. In the next place, the larger the 
number, the greater will be the proportion of mem- 
bers of limited information and weak capacities. 
. . . The more multitudinous a representative 
assembly may be rendered, the more it will 
partake of the infirmities incident to collective 
meetings of people. Ignorance will be the dupe 
of cunning, and passion the slave of sophistry and 
declamation. The people can never err more than 
in supposing that by multiplying their representa- 
tives beyond a certain limit, they strengthen the 
barrier against the government of a few. . . . 
The coimtenance of the government may become 
more democratic, but the soul that animates it will 
become more oligarchic. The machine will be 
enlarged, but the fewer, and often the more 
" i6i 



CJje (j^reatesit iSmerican 

secret, will be the springs by which its motions 
are directed." 

Hamilton then proceeded to answer "the credu- 
lous votaries of State power" who feared to allow 
the central government the right to alter regulations, 
except as to the places for choosing Senators, that 
shall be made by State legislatures in prescribing 
the times, places and manner of holding congres- 
sional elections. He laid down the cardinal truth, 
once more, that "every government ought to con- 
tain in itself the means of its own preservation"; 
demonstrated that a failure or refusal on the part 
of the States to provide or to operate electoral 
machinery, could result in a negation of the Con- 
stitution; and insisted, unanswerably, that "if the 
State legislatures were to be invested with an ex- 
clusive power of regulating these elections, every 
period of making them would be a delicate cri- 
sis in the national situation, which might issue 
in a dissolution of the Union." Like Lincoln, 
who seven decades later followed Hamiltonian 
precepts in making the maintenance of Union 
paramoimt to all else in the crises of Civil War, 
Hamilton's constant plea and relentless aspira- 
tion was an indivisible and impregnable federal 
solidarity. 

162 



tKi^t (^reatesit American 

The authorship of Hamilton, Madison and Jay 
mingles together from the sixty-second to the 
sixty-sixth Federalists inclusive; but the admitted 
authorship of Hamilton in the last two and prob- 
ably in the first two, continues to justify history's 
habit of counting "Publius" and Hamilton as one. 
In these chapters, the Senate and its prerogatives 
were discussed. The method of electing Senators 
(by State legislatures) was dismissed with least 
attention and may, therefore, reasonably be said to 
have weighed with least controversial importance. 
This method has since been changed. In other 
respects, the Senatorial system, recommended by 
the Founders, still stands unimpaired. But the 
intervening century has not sufficed to suspend 
popular arguments regarding it. Since the same 
prejudice which Hamilton contested in 1788 still 
frequently counsels abolition of the Senate or 
curtailment of its powers in 1920, it is worth while 
to examine the logic which saved a Senate then 
and which should save it now and always. 

In epitome, The Federalist set down the follow- 
ing distinct reasons for such a Senate as the 
American Constitution provides: 

(i) "It is a misfortune incident to republi- 
can government, though in less degree than to 

163 



^i)t ^xtattit American 

other governments, that those who administer it 
may forget their obligations to their constituents, 
and prove unfaithful to their important trust. A 
Senate doubles the security to the people, by re- 
quiring the conciirrence of two distinct bodies in 
schemes of usurpation or perfidy, where the ambi- 
tion or corruption of one would otherwise be 
sufficient." 

(2) The necessity of a Senate is indicated "by 
the propensity of all single and nimierous assemblies 
to the impulse of sudden and violent passions, and 
to be seduced by factious leaders into intemperate 
and pernicious resolutions. A body which is to 
correct this infirmity ought itself to be free from it, 
and consequently ought to be less numerous. It 
ought, moreover, to possess great firmness, and 
consequently ought to hold its authority by a 
tenure of considerable duration." 

(3) Another defect to be supplied by the Senate 
lies in a "want of due acquaintance and experience 
with the objects and principles of legislation — a 
want bound to be evident in greater degree in an 
assembly (like the House of Representatives) con- 
tinued in appointment for a short time. What are 
all the repealing, explaining, and amending laws, 
which fill and disgrace our voluminous codes, but 

164 



^f)t (Greatest i^merican 

so many monuments of deficient wisdom ; so many- 
impeachments exhibited by each succeeding against 
each preceding session; so many admonitions to 
the people of the value of those aids which may 
be expected from a well-constituted Senate?" 

(4) The mutability in the public councils, 
arising from a rapid succession of new members, 
however qualified they may be, "points out, in 
the strongest manner, the necessity of some stable 
institution in the government. The calamitous 
effects of a mutable policy of government permeate 
its every phase, foreign and domestic." 

(5) A Senate establishes our "national 
character." 

(6) A Senate establishes continuity of govern- 
ment. "An assembly (House of Representatives) 
elected for so short a term as to be unable to pro- 
vide more than one or two links in a chain of 
measiu'cs, on which the general welfare may essen- 
tially depend, ought not to be answerable for the 
final result, any more than a steward or tenant, 
engaged for one year, could be justly made to an- 
swer for places or improvements which could not 
be accomplished in less than half a dozen years." 

(7) Such an institution as the Senate may 
sometimes be necessary as a defense to the people 

165 



^fje (Creates;! American 

against their own temporary errors and delusions. 
"There are particular moments in public affairs 
when the people, stimulated by some irregular 
passion, or some illicit advantage, or misled by the 
artful misrepresentations of interested men, may 
call for measures which they themselves will after- 
wards be the most ready to lament and condemn. 
In these critical moments, how salutary will be the 
interference of some temperate and respectable 
body of citizens in order to check the misguided 
career, and to suspend the blow meditated by the 
people against themselves, until reason, justice 
and truth can regain their authority over the public 
mind? What bitter anguish would not the people 
of Athens have often escaped if their government 
had contained so provident a safeguard against 
the tyranny of their own passions? Popular liberty 
might have escaped the indelible reproach of de- 
creeing to the same citizens the hemlock on one 
day and statues on the next. Liberty may be en- 
dangered by the abuses of liberty as well as by 
the abuses of power." 

In modern experience we have seen this logic 
justified. If we may assume that the ultimate 
electoral refusal of the people to endorse The Cove- 
nant of The League of Nations in all its pristine 

1 66 



strictiires was a correct verdict, then nothing but 
the existence of a Senate with concurrent treaty- 
making powers, operating exactly as Hamilton 
described, saved America from the grave error 
of yielding to an initial "passion" which loudly and 
overwhelmingly demanded unquestioning and un- 
reserved American obeisance when President Wilson 
first brought his Covenant home and presented 
his appeal. 

From the sixty-seventh to the seventy-seventh 
Federalists, Hamilton disarmed the advocates of 
a plural executive power and particularly indicted 
those adversaries who insisted upon pretending an 
affinity between the proposed Presidency of the 
United States and the royal prerogatives of an 
unlimited King. ' ' The image of Asiatic despotism 
and voluptuousness," he wrote, "have scarcely 
been wanting to crown the exaggerated scene. We 
have been taught to tremble at the terrific visages 
of murdering janizaries, and to blush at the un- 
veiled mysteries of a future seraglio. ... I 
hesitate not to submit it to the decision of any 
candid and honest adversary, whether language 
can furnish epithets of too much asperity, for so 
shameless and so prostitute an attempt to impose 
on the citizens of America." 

167 



tE^fje (Greatest American 

We of this modem day can scarcely comprehend 
the lengths to which Hamilton's opponents went 
in "contriving to pervert the public opinion"; 
although to comprehend them is to comprehend 
the stupendous power of the frail, yoimg states- 
man who bore the bnmt of the battle that 
wore these opponents down. Hamilton took as 
his major and typical example the pretense 
that imder the Constitution the President would 
have the power to fill casual vacancies in the 
Senate. Through intervening years we have seen 
Senate vacancies filled so many times by action 
of a Governor's interim appointment or a state 
legislature's franchise, that we accept the process 
as being incontestably patent. Yet Hamilton had 
to plead with obdurate New Yorkers who in- 
sisted otherwise in their blind aim to clothe their 
imaginary White House throne and scepter with 
incontinent authority. 

Much consideration is given in these chapters 
to the presidential tenure and its license of "re- 
eligibility" to repeated elections. Hamilton's 
observations upon this score are doubly illumi- 
nating in light of formidable latter-day agitation ' 

' Formally expressed in the Democratic National 
Platform of 191 2. 

168 



for a lengthened single term and a barrier against 
"re-eligibility." Upon this latter proposition, 
The Federalist said: 

"This exclusion would have effects which would 
be for the most part rather pernicious than salu- 
tary. One ill effect of this exclusion would be a 
diminution of the inducements to good behaviour. 
. . . Another ill effect would be the temptation 
to sordid views, to peculation and, in some in- 
stances, to usurpation. . . . That experience 
is the parent of wisdom is an adage the truth of 
which is recognized by the wisest as well as the 
simplest of mankind. What more desirable or 
more essential than this quality in the government 
of nations? Can it be wise to put this quality 
imder the ban of the Constitution, and to declare 
that the moment it is acquired its possessor shall 
be compelled to abandon the station in which it 
was acquired, and to which it is adapted? . . . 
A fourth ill effect of the exclusion would be the 
banishing men from stations in which, in certain 
emergencies of the State, their presence might be 
of the greatest moment to the public interest or 
safety. ... A fifth ill effect would be that it 
wovild operate as a constitutional interdiction of 
stability in the administration." 

169 



Ctje (Greatest American 

Hamilton argued against "necessitating a change 
of men" — against "disabling the people to con- 
tinue in office men who had entitled themselves 
to approbation and confidence." Who shall say, 
today, that he was not wise in his generation, 
wiser even than modern reformers who would 
borrow from the very purposes and arguments 
against which he fought? Who shall say that a 
tradition and a habit against a prolonged presi- 
dency is not better and safer than a constitutional 
stricture? The one is elastic under pressure of 
necessity; the other is a self-made barrier which is 
as insurmountable as, in some crisis, it might be 
fatal. 

The seventy-eighth to the eighty-third Federal- 
ists, dealing with the federal judiciary, disclose still 
another side to this man of marvelous capacity. 
They constitute the masterful brief of a superbly 
great lawyer who has few peers in the whole story 
of American law. With convincing force he argued 
the justification for every judicial contemplation 
in the scheme of Government which the Constitu- 
tion proposed. "Courts," said he, finally, "are 
to be considered as the bulwark of a limited Con- 
stitution against legislative encroachment." Also: 
"they are requisite to guard the Constitution and 

170 



tBiit ^vtattit iSmerican 

the rights of individuals from the effects of those 
ill humors which the arts of designing men, or the 
influence of particular conjunctures, sometimes 
disseminate among the people themselves, and 
which, though they speedily give place to better 
information and more deliberate reflection, have a 
tendency, in the meantime, to occasion dangerous 
innovations in the Government and serious op- 
pressions on the minor party in the community." 

Here, too, Hamilton laid down this foundation 
principle — reflecting not only his own passion for 
law and order but also his country's perpetual 
necessities in these directions. "People have the 
right to alter or abolish the established Constitu- 
tion, whenever they find it inconsistent with their 
happiness; but until the people have, by some 
solemn and authoritative act, annulled or changed 
the established form, it is binding upon themselves, 
collectively, as well as individually; and no pre- 
sumption, or even knowledge, of their sentiments 
can warrant their representatives in a departure 
from it, prior to such an act." 

Unfriendly historians have stressed Hamilton's 
original advocacy of a life-tenure for Presidents 
and Senators as confession that he was at heart 
undemocratic. They have made the error of con- 

171 



Wtt (^reatesft !3merican 

fusing a belief in strong, continuing, central au- 
thority, with a disbelief in the people from whose 
loins the strong, central authority should spring. 
Such error and suspicion must be dissipated in the 
face of two sentences — a veritable Magna Charta 
of Democracy — which proclaimed the essence of 
The Federalist, as follows: 

"The fabric of American empire ought to rest on 
the solid basis of the consent of the people. The 
stream of national power ought to flow immedi- 
ately from that pure, original fountain of all 
legitimate authority." 



172 



5rf)E Jf ounber of tfje ^utjlic Crebit 

No nation ever was or ever will be stronger 
than its public credit. In the last analysis govern- 
ment always was and always will be a matter of 
business. The most beautiful idealisms floimder 
until properly financed. The hidden but ever- 
lurking reefs of fiscal instability have wrecked more 
human experiments than any other single element. 
Quicksand undermines any himian institution 
that is economically unsound. The great Ameri- 
can adventure was no exception to this formtila. 
Its inspired conception and its exalted creeds were 
at the mercy of material things. Except as it was 
saved from fiscal chaos which threatened upon every 
hand, except as it was organized upon healthy 
economic law, in which the new world was illy 
schooled, it would have suffered still-bom fate. 
That the American Ship of State was safely 
laimched, despite these snarling knots upon the 
stays, is credit — and, this time, unquestionably 
exclusive credit — to Alexander Hamilton. 

173 



tKfje (^reatesft American 

Hamilton first disclosed his inborn genius for 
fiscal foresight while he was yet a youthful soldier 
on General Washington's staff. Despite arduous 
and exacting military and secretarial tasks which 
burdened him far beyond the physical resistance 
normally to be taxed against so frail a physique as 
was his, Hamilton's mind constantly meditated 
upon questions of government and finance even 
in these earliest days before independence had been 
safely won. Already he sensed the insecurity of 
loose federal control. With depreciated bills in 
circulation amounting to $160,000,000, a public 
debt of $40,000,000 and an unpaid army with fast 
multiplying arrears, he saw the approaching 
menace of a pyramiding crisis in the shaky Con- 
federacy's fiscal affairs. Let it be remembered 
that the science of modern political economy was 
as yet a mystery and that latter-day refinements 
in methods of expedited finance were utterly un- 
known. Adam Smith's Wealth of Nations was 
but four years old and had not reached America. 
Precedents were meager and safe authorities scarce. 
Yet, in the midst of military distractions, far from 
books or records or counsel, young Hamilton, just 
turned twenty-three, wrote to Robert Morris and 
out of a luminous intellect constructively discussed 

174 



the whole structure of the unsteady Confederacy's 
financial affairs. He analyzed the worthlessness 
of existing currency and the causes of its deprecia- 
tion. He pointed out that only real money, and 
that obtained by foreign loans, could save the 
desperate situation; and then, for the first time, he 
proposed the great idea which was to become the 
bone and sinew of his subsequent achievements. 
He proposed the creation of The National Bank — 
to be called The Bank of the United States — which 
was to unify the moneyed interests of the country 
in one common enterprise for the advantage of the 
public credit and the facility of trade. 

This oracular program was at once so novel and 
so ambitious that Hamilton, after reading his letter 
to General Washington, sent it off with anonymous 
signature, lest the unknown credentials of its 
author should depreciate the profound importance 
of its dialectics. But the "James Montague of 
Morristown " who thus made the first proposals for 
a federal system of finance which was soon to be- 
come the material bulwark of a liberated people 
was not of a disposition to avoid responsibility for 
the evolution of his dream. When Robert Morris, 
the unselfish patriot who dedicated his whole vast 
fortune to the war-cause of the Colonies and who 

175 



Wtt i^reatesit American 

was then struggling vainly with the strings of the 
Confederacy's empty purse, replied with prompt 
sympathy and hearty appreciation, Hamilton flimg 
off his nom de plume. He wrote to James Duane, 
then a member of Congress from New York, and 
to Isaac Sears, another sturdy New York patriot, 
urging the vital necessity of "a government with 
more power, a tax in kind, a foreign loan, and a 
bank on the true principles of a bank." In the 
spring of 1 78 1 he submitted a second, formal memo- 
randum to Morris, reiterating his proposal for a 
National Bank and ampHfying details to a degree 
that displayed an imcanny prevision and distin- 
guished him apart as combined oracle and genius. 
"Power without revenue, in political society, is a 
name," he wrote contemporaneously in The Con- 
tinentalist. He was years ahead of his time. 
Out of the prodigality of his ideas, only a few were 
then adopted. His great, central undertakings 
had to await a maturer day; aye, a day when he 
himself could be constructor as well as architect 
of the actual institutions of the new republican 
experiment. 

As Continental Receiver of Taxes for New York, 
a critical position which he accepted in 1782 at the 
urgent soHcitation of Morris, he once more ex- 

176 



Clbc (^reatesit American 

pounded his doctrines, but still to an unready 
people. Morris, best qualified to judge the relative 
capacities of the men of that moving time, wrote 
him "your perfect knowledge of men and measures, 
and the abilities with which Heaven has blessed 
you will give you a fine opportimity to forward 
the public service. ' ' He went to Poughkeepsie and 
did his brilliant best to induce a feeble and timid 
legislatiire to establish scientific taxation upon the 
ruins of existing fiscal confusion worse confounded. 
But popular vision was not yet blessed with his 
horizon. The most of tangible advantage that he 
achieved was to win a few thousand pounds into a 
yawning treasury. But, intangibly and propheti- 
cally, he was strengthening the foundations upon 
which ultimately he was to erect a fiscal structure 
that was destined to become the headstone in the 
comer. 

One year in the pallid Continental Congress, 
where the timidity of pseudo-central power and the 
incohesion of its member-states defeated his ardent 
advocacy of a federal tax on imports, only served 
to confirm his profoimd convictions. "No one 
but believes you a man of honor and of republican 
principles," wrote James McHenry, Lafayette's 
former aide and a member of this Congress. ' ' Were 

177 



^fje d^reategt iSmeritan 

you ten years older and 20,000 pounds richer, there 
is no doubt but that you might obtain the suffrages 
of Congress for the highest office in their gift." 

In the period which had to intervene ere Hamil- 
ton's larger vision brought its economic blessings to 
his whole country, he applied his genius and 
pioneer ideas to assisting in the foundation of the 
Bank of New York — a working model, in a modest 
way, of the greater structure he was yet to build. 
Meanwhile, too, sitting in the New York legisla- 
ture, he once more waged a mighty contest to secure 
a state grant of permanent revenue to Congress, 
but failed. He realized now that no expedient 
could serve. There must be a new government or 
there soon would be no government at all. 

Then history wrote with rushing pen. General 
Washington, the placid, magnanimous, trusted idol 
of his time because first President of the United 
States and designated Hamilton as first Secretary 
to preside over the uncertain destinies of the new 
Department of the Treasury. Hamilton promptly 
closed his law offices in New York, traded his re- 
munerative private income for a comparatively 
paltry federal stipend, gave up the peace and the 
easy accomplishment which was his professional 
lot as a leader at the bar, and without a moment's 

178 



^tt (Greatest American 

hesitation answered his beloved chieftain's draft 
which ordered him to the most delicate, the most 
desperate, the most important responsibility con- 
fronting The Great Experiment. He became at 
once the boldest and the most constructive Min- 
ister who ever held an American portfoHo or 
dominated an administration. 

Ten days after Hamilton's appointment, Con- 
gress directed him to prepare a report upon the 
public credit. It turned to him instinctively as 
to a saviour, confident of his abilities to chart re- 
lease from the chaos which loomed on every side. 
Promptly he responded with the recommendation 
of temporary measures that should suffice until 
the permanent foundations might be put down. 
Immediate funds were necessary for the pressing 
wants of the new government before any considera- 
tion could be given to this permanent system that 
should bring permanent relief to the nation's empty 
coffers and tragically broken credit. With infinite 
sagacity and resourcefulness he bridged this gap, 
oft times by pledging his own personal credit as 
Robert Morris had done before him. He laid out a 
complete system of federal accounting which siu*- 
vives, in principle, to this modem day. Amid it 
all, he wrote his formal answer to the original con- 

179 



Wf)t i^reatejsft American 

gressional request; and, following the January re- 
cess, he presented his first great Report upon the 
Public Credit — the Magna Charta of American 
governmental finance. It was as comprehensive 
in scope as it was minute in detail. It was a 
perfectly squared comer stone ready to be placed 
in the permanent f oimdations of the governmental 
structure which was destined to bear the weight of 
centuries. It was the climax to a lifetime of 
preparation for a crisis. 

In this and in subsequent reports which followed 
in swift succession, Hamilton est abh shed the fiscal 
system and policies and machinery of the United 
States, not alone for his own time, but in large 
measure for posterity. He first demonstrated the 
necessity for a bulwarked public credit, not alone 
as a source of revenue, but equally as a source of 
national greatness, honor, defense against aggres- 
sion, and security for public order. Then he pro- 
ceeded with his astute ways and means. He 
proposed to consolidate and fund all the debts of 
the United States incurred in war or derivative 
therefrom. To relieve immediate pressure he pro- 
posed to turn a portion of this debt into long-time 
bonds; but for no debt did he propose to concede 
repudiation. He divided the debt into three parts ; 

i8o 



CJje i^reate^t American 

the foreign debt and the domestic debt totaling 
$54,000,000 and the debts of the States amounting 
to $25,000,000. These are small figures in this 
modern day of billion-dollar saturnalias. But 
they were gigantic and appalling in 1790. To 
enhance the revenues necessary to finance his pro- 
gram, he proposed an increased excise on imports, 
it always being his theory to avoid direct taxation 
as far as possible and to put the major burden of all 
tax quests upon luxuries or non-essentials. Having 
carried this theory to its practical limit, he pro- 
posed an internal revenue assessed against the 
domestic manufacture of spirits. This latter thing 
was a direct test of the strength of the new central 
sovereignty because it invaded a field in which the 
States heretofore had enjoyed a jealous and ex- 
clusive jurisdiction. But he faced his problem 
only with the more unflinching determination 
because it involved a powerful determination of 
political as well as economic concerns. Always 
he thrived on opposition. Then he proposed to 
found his long meditated National Bank; first, as 
a resuscitation to the public credit ; second, to pro- 
vide capital and a circulating mediimi vital to the 
conduct of domestic trade and foreign commerce; 
third, to restore general public confidence; fourth, 

181 



tlDfje (Hreatest American 

to facilitate the day-to-day ttrnsactions of business, 
through the issuance of such bank notes as are now 
a routine essential in our business lives; fifth, to 
erect one more, central citadel of Union strength 
and power and federalized authority. He pro- 
posed a mint and the coinage of money on a dollar, 
decimal base. He outlined the complete philoso- 
phy of the modernly known "protective tariff." 
In a word, he prepared the encyclopedic charts 
which, with such changes as have been necessitated 
by circumstance and national development, re- 
main today as the basic financial doctrines of the 
Government of the United States. 

It was one thing to propose; another to obtain. 
But Hamilton never shunned a battle ; and into this 
one he once more rode with all the indomitable 
spirit at his command. The immediate conse- 
quence of the publication of his reports was a fifty 
per cent rise in the value of the securities of the 
bankrupt Confederation, a flurry of inordinate 
speculation which grasped for easy profits out of 
these unexpected prospects of redemption, and a 
corresponding stride in the congressional bitter- 
ness with which his proposals were attacked. It 
was a habit of that expedient day to repudiate 
whatever it was inconvenient to redeem. No one 

182 



tIDfje <§reategt American 

openly objected to squaring foreign accounts. 
But the domestic debt was a different proposition. 
Hamilton's opposition disguised its real penury in 
a sanctimonious protest against the speculators 
who had bought up the old certificates at their 
depreciated values and who were in the way of 
large, unearned and imdeserved dividends if the 
government now validated this debt at par. The 
"original holder" became a sudden sotirce of ex- 
treme political solicitation, though this "original 
holder" was usually one of those rugged, ragged 
Continental soldiers for whom Hamilton had un- 
availingly besought proper compensation in other 
days from many of these same shifty statesmen 
who now joined the hue and cry against him 
and his prodigious undertakings. Even Madison 
joined the opposition, the beginning of his break 
with the Federalists, and proposed a discrimina- 
tory settlement. But to all evasion or compromise 
Hamilton and his party — the Federalists were now 
a party in the true sense of modern usage — turned 
deaf ears. To restore the credit, the honor and the 
good name of the United States could permit of 
no pawnbrokering in government securities by 
the government itself, no matter in whose hands 
these securities might have finally lodged. A 

183 



promise to pay was sacred and its repudiation 
could be excused by no expedient reasoning if the 
pledged word of the debtor-nation was to stand 
clean before the world. These were the cardinal 
tenets of Hamilton's demands in relation to the 
Confederacy's foreign and domestic debt. We 
were the legatees of the Revolution's benefits; we 
must be the legatees of its griefs and burdens. 
That strong men rallied vigorously to his support 
made victory for his contentions possible. But 
without Hamilton, neither rally nor victory could 
have obtained. Once more a people's destiny 
hung upon him and his powers. 

At the end of long and acrimonious debate the 
Federalists won their point. This left the assimip- 
tion of the debts of the States to be determined; 
and the battle that ensued aligned men and parties 
in the bitterest of feuds. Against assimiption it 
was argued: first, that too great a yoke would be 
laid upon a struggling land; second, that such a 
burden was an injustice to the United States; 
third, that such a policy was inequitable in its 
favors to heavily mortgaged States and in its rela- 
tive indifference to the rights of States that had 
been more provident or more fortunate; fourth, 
that by unifying the nation's war obligations, it 

184 



unified the nation itself in greater degree than a 
proper conception of States Rights could concede. 
Feeling was intense and arguments were vicious. 
The Anti-Federalists at last found themselves with 
a concrete issue around which to rally an opposi- 
tion that always had been at war with Hamilton 
and with effective Union, but which had lacked 
cohesion and morale. Also they soon found them- 
selves with a distinguished leader — for Thomas 
Jefferson had just arrived from France and become 
Washington's Secretary of State. 

But Hamilton was no stranger to contest against 
overwhelming prejudice and heavy, hostile odds. 
If he could win New York to the Constitution as 
by miracle, he could win Congress to assumption. 
Loyally assisted by strong lieutenants on the floor 
of Congress, he gave uncompromising battle, and 
shortly won an initial victory in committee of 
the whole by desperately narrow margin. The 
staggered, but determined, opposition jockeyed 
for delays imtil the State delegation from North 
Carolina, at last in the Union, arrived and furnish- 
ed a thin majority of two against assumption. In 
this dead-locked impasse the factions faced and 
fought each other for many perilous days during 
which threats of dissolution were common cur- 

185 



tU^iit (^reatesft American 

rency and the fate of America trembled in the 
balance. A less resolute and resourceful leader 
would have collapsed in the presence of such a 
barrier. Hamilton was not himself a member of 
the Congress and the forensic weapons which had 
won his victory at Poughkeepsie in the New York 
Constitutional Convention were foreclosed to his 
present use. But his was not a one-track mind. 
It was true of him as Goldsmith said of Johnson: 
"There's no arguing with him; if his pistol misses 
fire, he knocks you down with the butt end of 
it." He found the vulnerable spot in the armor 
of the Anti-Federalists and quietly proceeded 
to achieve by state-craft what his lieutenants 
could not gain by force. Because he deemed 
every element of his financial program vital to his 
country, he would not compromise upon it in one 
single phase. But because it was inconsequential 
to the fundaments of government where the 
permanent Capitol should be located, he pro- 
ceeded to trade votes in the minor matter in order 
to achieve the major need. 

This question of a permanent site for the federal 
city had been second only to assimiption in its 
power to incite acid controversy. Whether this 
crown jewel should fall to the North or to the South 

1 86 



was a contention rich in state prides and factions 
and sectional jealousies. To Hamilton, who now 
as always gloried in a continental mind, this rivalry 
was of but petty moment. But he seized it as the 
agency for compromise. Most of the votes favor- 
ing assumption were North; most votes opposing 
asstmiption were South. Jefferson was still too 
fresh from France to have acquired the hatred of 
Hamilton which ultimately came to fill his soul, 
yet his long absence from America had not dulled 
him to a share in his Virginia's ambitions to lure 
the Capitol city South. In a quiet conference be- 
tween these two members of President Washing- 
ton's first official family, Hamilton agreed to secure 
votes for a southern Capitol and Jefferson agreed 
to secure votes for asstmiption. In after years 
Jefferson sought to pretend that he was duped in 
this transaction. But his pretensions were ridicu- 
lous. He may have been out-generaled by a su- 
perior genius. He may have been victimized by 
his own lack of foresight in failing to realize that he 
was helping to forge one more link into the chain of 
federalized control which he later sought to break. 
But he was not "duped." Hamilton was not 
that fashion of a man. Nor, indeed, was Jeffer- 
son. In any event, for Jefferson to deprecate this 

187 



tCfjc i^reatesit l^merican 

historic bargain — a bargain which alone made 
assumption possible — leaves Alexander Hamilton 
with sole and exclusive credit for one more achieve- 
ment which saved the United States in an hour of 
peril that could easily have hastened the Civil 
War by seventy years. To complain of the bar- 
gain is to complain of its fruits. To repudiate its 
wisdom is to repudiate its net results. The results 
were the preservation and perpetuation of an 
honorable public integrity in the foundation of the 
public credit, and the establishment of the Capitol 
City of Washington. These, then, become two 
more monimients to Alexander Hamilton. 

After assumption had been voted and the Capitol 
City located on the Potomac, Hamilton's proposals 
for the revenue, the excise and the mint were voted 
substantially as recommended. The National 
Bank alone remained for action. Once more the 
stubborn prejudice against strong federal control 
precipitated bitter strife. The opposition con- 
j tired every possible bogie and played on every 
possible chord of class and sectional faction. But 
the impetus of Hamilton's policies was not to be 
denied. The bill passed Congress by a snug ma- 
jority. Anti-Federalists made their last stand in 
the Cabinet. Madison, Jefferson and Randolph 



^^t <!^reates!t American 

filed written arguments with Washington to show 
the proposal iinconstitutional. Washington him- 
self was in doubt. His own Premier and his own 
Attorney-General were vehement in their hostile 
recommendations. Washington went so far as 
to ask Madison for a form of veto. But, amid a 
multitude of other pressing obligations, Hamilton 
drafted his famous defense, invoking the implied 
powers of the Constitution, which not only won 
Washington and saved the Bank, but also set a legal 
precedent which will live as long as the Republic 
stands. The juridical phases of this latter import- 
ant circumstance deserve an emphasis at greater 
length which is undertaken in a subsequent chapter. 
The seal of Washington's deliberate approval 
upon this entire fiscal program which Hamilton 
builded was not the least of its credentials. The 
fact that Washington, overruling other intimate 
advisers, thus joined with Hamilton, time and 
again, in these parading crises demonstrated — as 
have subsequent events — that the minds of these 
two mighty men were soundly in solemn concert in 
all these critical affairs upon which hung the 
destiny of modern institutions. It was their 
partnership which set up the House of Govern- 
ment and put it in running order. 

189 



The Anti-Federalists, consolidated by Jefferson 
and Madison, left no malignant resort unattempted 
to break down this partnership and to ruin Hamil- 
ton. They failed in the former when Washington 
whole-heartedly ruled with his Treasurer when 
Hamilton made his famous written reply to the 
fulminating accusations filed against him with the 
President by his routed adversaries; they failed in 
the latter when Congress overwhelmingly defeated 
nine resolutions of censure aimed at Hamilton's 
honor and integrity. This latter unfragrant epi- 
sode opened with an abusive and declamatory 
demand in Congress for an accounting on foreign 
loans and a general ventilation of insinuated 
frauds. It hastened to climax through a rapid 
fire of responsive reports from the indicted Minis- 
ter so accurate, so comprehensive, and so lucid that 
Hamilton's probity and intellect shone forth like 
brilliant stars. It closed with a tragically lone- 
some minority, uncomfortable Madison among the 
number, voting for resolutions of censure which 
the Federalists forced to a decisive vote, refusing 
to allow that they should be snuffed quietly and 
softly into oblivion. Maranatha never plotted 
more devilishly against an honest man nor failed 
more completely to spot its mark. "It has since 

190 



been admitted by all persons — even those most 
opposed to Hamilton, the statesman, and most 
inimical to Hamilton, the man — that in all matters 
of money and business he uniformly displayed an 
integrity altogether irreproachable, a sense of 
honor delicate to the last degree," says John T. 
Morse, Jr., in his Life of Hamilton. "Against all 
insinuations of wrongdoing in the conduct of the 
affairs of his department he has long since been 
acknowledged to be impregnable." 

Hamilton's contributions to the fiscal piers of 
the Republic were now drawing to a close. One 
stirring chapter alone remained to be written. 
The passage of the 1791 excise law brought prompt 
rebellion in Western Pennsylvania, where the 
manufacture of whiskey was chiefly concentrated, 
and in certain sections of Virginia and North 
Carolina. While Hamilton, in the discharge of 
his official duties, made every effort to render the 
law as unobnoxious as possible, he was firm as 
granite in his determination to enforce the tax; 
first, because he would have surrendered his life 
rather than consent that his theory of Government 
w^as powerless to defend the central sovereignty 
against any insubordinate sector; second, because 
he conceived it vital that the federal authority 

191 



tKte (^reatesit jamerican 

to spread this tax be vindicated and the avails 
secured to a famished Treasury. A History of the 
Insurrection in the Four Western Counties oj Penn- 
sylvania in 1794, written by William Findley in 
1796, advances Lhe curious theory that Hamilton's 
"delay" or "negligence" in enforcing the excise 
law was a deliberately intended effort to foster dis- 
orders "until they would produce a more serious 
issue." " Many men knew," wrote Findley, "that 
he who stood at the helm of the revenue depart- 
ment had no aversion to being employed as a pilot 
in the storm." This exhibit is interesting chiefly 
as it testifies to the extent of ramifying suspicions 
which Hamilton had to confront in effecting uni- 
versal submission to the new government and its 
authority. Findley, of course, was entirely within 
the facts when he testified that Hamilton "had no 
aversion to being employed as a pilot in the storm." 
There never was a storm before which he ever 
flinched, nor in which he was not ready, on the 
instant, to grasp the wheel and steer the course. 
There never was a responsibility which he shirked 
nor a crisis for which he was unprepared. But that 
he invited the "Whiskey Rebellion" for the sake 
of the sheer joy of putting it down is one more 
absurd libel, born of the partisan vituperation 

192 



^fje i^ceategt Ilmerican 

of the time, and suggestive principally of Ham- 
ilton's dominion over the harrowed and jealous 
imagination of his foes. 

In the summer of 1 792 Hamilton drafted a stern 
proclamation addressed to these petty rebels, 
which Jefferson protestingly countersigned and 
Washington willingly promulgated. This warn- 
ing, plus Washington's tremendous personal in- 
fluence in the South, quelled the restless forces 
of anarchy in Carolina and Virginia. But the 
Western Pennsylvanians graduated from insolence 
and outrage into open, armed defiance of the 
Government and its agencies. Another hour of 
decisive test had come and it found Hamilton, as 
always, not only ready with every detail to meet 
the emergency with swift zeal, but also eager to 
lead the military forces which Washington called 
to arms to crush this "Whiskey Rebellion's" chal- 
lenge to the authority of the Republic. Washing- 
ton; with Hamilton at his side, met this as he met 
every othei"" rri sis . An army of 1 5 , 000 men marched 
into the trea.'"'on :one. Hamilton assumed its 
general super ri-itendence. One parley, sought by 
the insncnc^^nts and readily granted, failed. The 
army deployed foi action. The mere display 

of firm intent sufficed. The rebellion faded 
^3 193 



Wi)t (^vtattit i^merican 

into universal surrender which Hamilton accepted 
with un vengeful toleration and forbearance. He 
sought to avoid unnecessary scars; but he sought 
first to establish for all time the power of the 
federal Government to levy and collect an excise 
tax and to rule its subordinate units under the 
Constitution. Before, during and after the 
"Whiskey Rebellion" his policy was the first 
model, in a relatively small but at the time dread- 
fully critical way, of the policy which inspired 
Lincoln before, during and after a later Rebellion 
which closed the final chapter in the record 
of questioned Union and its powers of self- 
preservation. 

Any consideration of Hamilton's relationships 
to America's soimd economic foundations and his 
contributions to the public credit would be incom- 
plete without an epitomizing survey of his influ- 
ence upon the government's relations with de- 
veloped commerce and industry. We turn barjk, 
therefore, in the climax of this particul?"d;r chapter 
to exhibits upon this important score. HamxiUjin 
was America's first great economist and the cen- 
tury that has since intervened, despite its profoimd 
development of a science which was an uncertain 

194 



^^t #reates;t American 

exploration in Hamilton's day, has not produced 
his peer. The heirs to his economic wisdom have 
borrowed his mold and given it expansion and im- 
provement. But they are still tramping down the 
trails he blazed. He set guide-posts on our eco- 
nomic highways that still point the route to sotmd 
public policy in the contacts between government 
and commerce. 

At the close of 1791, in the culmination of a 
series of diversified state papers which soimded 
the depths of every important problem confronting 
embryo America, Hamilton sent his "Report on 
Manufactures" to the first American Congress. 
It was presented as the cap-sheaf in the financial 
policies which the first Secretary of the Treasury 
gave to his hard-pressed contemporaries and be- 
queathed to posterity. But its importance tran- 
scended application limited to any single field. It 
was addressed to the development of the resources 
of the new coimtry, to the end that the United 
States should be rendered as strong and as inde- 
pendent in material as in political concerns. It 
reflected the practical vision of a statesman who 
realized that prosperity and perpetuity were 
synonyms in the lexicon of experimental republican 
institutions. 

195 



Cfje (^reatejst American 

Incidental to his program — yet prophetic of the 
great evolution since seen — Hamilton enunciated for 
the first time the doctrine of internal improvements 
at public expense. He particularly emphasized 
the propriety of federal encouragement in the con- 
struction of roads and bridges. He also proposed 
a system for encouraging creative genius through 
the protection of patents. There was no useful 
detail which this master builder forgot or ignored. 
All were essential cogs in the great economic ma- 
chine. But the paramount purpose behind his 
elaborate, painstaking "Report on Manufactures" 
was to emphasize the importance of industry in the 
evolution of successful and stabilized government, 
and to challenge attention to the need, as a govern- 
ment policy, of giving it encouragement. In this 
fashion was the whole ' ' protectionist policy ' ' in Am- 
erica born and under these auspices. It is rarely 
given to one man to propose some powerful phi- 
losophy which lives down the ages with its influence 
upon the affairs of peoples. Yet Hamilton was 
the author of tvv^o: first, his proposition that the 
Constitution is clothed with "implied powers" 
essential unto its functions; second, that a protec- 
tive tariff is necessary to make a nation economi- 
cally independent . This latter doctrine has been the 

196 



dominating issue in countless subsequent political 
campaigns — more emphatically featured long years 
after Hamilton's death than it was in his living 
time. Until the Great War upset all normal cal- 
culations, both as to revenue and industry, the 
protective tariff has been the traditional dividmg 
philosophy to distinguish between Republicanism 
and Democracy for the last half century. In its 
repeated application to American conditions, it 
has vindicated every hope that Hamilton proposed 
for it. To have been its American foimder be- 
speaks credentials which even the modern disbe- 
liever in "protection" will concede to measure a 
mighty mentality with a powerful grasp upon the 
nation's economic future which was illy evident in 
the disorganization and commercial chaos in the 
midst of which he wrote. Indeed, he wrote for the 
future. In most respects his "Report on Manu- 
factures" was more a legacy than an immediate 
advantage. 

In exhaustive detail which examined every 
article of industry in all its relations, Hamilton 
expounded his proposition that the establishment 
of American manufactures must be encouraged. 
Two fundamental aims impelled his vision; mili- 
tary security and national development. "Every 

197 



^i)t (^vtattit Slmerican 

nation, with a view to those great objects, ought 
to endeavor to possess within itself all the essen- 
tials of national supply," he wrote. "These com- 
prise the means of subsistence, habitation, clothing 
and defense. The possession of these is necessary 
to the perfection of the body politic; to the safety 
as well as to the welfare of society." From this 
premise he argued the essentiality of manufactures 
as well as agriculture and again demonstrated, as 
he had done in The Continentalist nine years 
before, the interdependence and the mutual recip- 
rocal interest of both. Upon that other occasion 
he had tritely said: "Oppress trade, lands sink in 
value; make it flourish, their value rises. En- 
cumber husbandry, trade declines; encourage 
agriculture, commerce revives." 

He refused to accept the easy alternative of 
leaving industry to find for itself the most useful 
and profitable employment. He was unwilling to 
await natural consequences, good or ill, if bene- 
ficent consequences could be guaranteed by gov- 
ernment action. He refused to concede that it 
was best for a thinly settled agricultural nation, 
like the new America, to buy its manufactured 
articles in foreign markets wherever cheapest price 
might seem superficially to beckon to greatest bar- 

198 



^ije i^reateflJt American 

gain. He was unwilling to leave the United States 
at the mercy of "combinations, right or wrong, of 
foreign policy." He refused to transfer responsi- 
bility for the whole good of the whole people to the 
initiative and commercial courage of individual 
pioneers in manufacture. He knew and did not 
hesitate to say that such dubious reliance left the 
country chained to "the fear of want of success in 
untried enterprises, the intrinsic difficulties of first 
essays, and the boimties, premiums and other arti- 
ficial encouragements with which foreign nations 
second the exertions of their own citizens." He 
refused to listen to the pretense that "protection" 
tends to create monopolies, erect class benefit at 
community expense, or sectional benefit at the ex- 
pense of other sections. He was impatient with any 
argument which did not acknowledge the horizon 
of all America; and the painstaking demonstrated 
that a benefit to one is a benefit to all in the final 
dissemination of its fruits. 

These sentences read less Hke ancient history 
than like a page from contemporary political de- 
bates. Nothing could testify more strikingly that 
Hamilton was the farthest seeing man of his age. 
Back in 1791 he was planning the encouragement 
of infant industry by a combination of bounties 

199 



tE^fje ^vtattit American 

and protective duties, the surplus revenues of the 
latter to supply the funds for the former. He was 
the first American "Protectionist." His whole 
theory of "protection," however, was for the crea- 
tion of whatever differential might be necessary 
to defend new industry on this side of the world 
from devastating competition at the hands of old, 
established industry on the other side of the world. 
In other words his idea of "protection" compre- 
hended nothing beyond this differential. Hence, 
he was the first author of the best modernly ac- 
cepted rule as to what a correct protective tariff 
should do; namely, to measure the difference in 
cost of production at home and abroad. His 
theory of "protection" was not a benefit to manu- 
facturers alone, but a benefit to the country 
through manufactures. A more pertinent distinc- 
tion could not be made; and Hamilton made it, by 
the nature of his argimient, 130 years ago. His 
whole "Report on Manufactures" remains to this 
day the most lucid and convincing and complete 
defense of a protective tariff system which has ever 
been given to the American people, not excepting 
any of the brilliant exponents who have since 
stormed America's economic conscience with am- 
plified Hamiltonian ideas. 

200 



^fie dlreategt !9merican 

Mr. Herbert Hoover, Secretary of Commerce in 
President Harding's Cabinet, offered some con- 
temporary observations in a banquet address 
(New York, May 2t„ 192 i), which throw a further 
illumination upon Hamilton's foresight in mingling 
matters of commerce and government. In the 
course of a speech which recalled the days of the 
Republic's foundation, Mr. Hoover said: 

"Alexander Hamilton was then Secretary of the 
Treasury, laying down those foundations of the eco- 
nomic life of America which still endure, to which 
we still adhere, or should adhere. Hamilton was 
the one man in the government of that day who 
visualized the importance of commerce, the im- 
portance of the service Government could do for 
commerce. He had proposed that the Cabinet 
should be composed of five members — Foreign 
Affairs, War, Treasury, Interior and Trade. And 
despite the cogent reasons that Hamilton enim- 
ciated for the creation of the last-named depart- 
ment, it was nearly 100 years before the commercial 
men of the United States realized that necessity 
into actual legislation." (Reported in the New 
York Herald, May 24, 1921.) 

In other words, Hamilton's fimctions not only 
served practically every department of Govem- 

201 



tE^ije i^reatesit American 

ment that was founded in his time but also leaped 
a century and anticipated the foundation of other 
works that were to come. 

Hamilton completed his great fiscal cycle by 
pushing through Congress a comprehensive plan 
for the ultimate redemption of the entire public 
debt. Thus, triumphantly, he finished his tre- 
mendous undertakings in behalf of soundly f oimded 
federal finance. With the luminous fixity of the 
north star he had held steadfastly to his course 
through more than a decade of barriers, discourage- 
ments, opposition and abuse. With daimtless per- 
severance and unquenchable courage — both vital 
to a people whom he served better than they knew 
— he had broken down every obstacle in the paths 
of fiscal evolution. For nearly six years he had 
carried the lonely burdens of a momentous public 
trust upon which the success of the first presi- 
dencies and the inheritance of American posterity 
turned. He had put down foundations and erect- 
ed a system which in basic respects was destined to 
adorn the ages. Speaking of Hamilton's resigna- 
tion as Secretary of the Treasury, one early 
commentator has said: "The confused and compli- 
cated facts of our financial condition, furnished 

202 



^f)t (^reatesit American 

from a thousand different sotirces, had come from 
his hand solidified and transparent; and with 
consiimmate genius and judgment he had so or- 
ganized the Treasury that but little was left for 
his successors to do except to execute his simple 
and comprehensive plans."' Indeed, when his 
arch-critic, Jefferson, became President in 1801 
and requested Albert Gallatin, his Secretary of 
the Treasury, to clean the Department of the cor- 
ruption and insanity which his prejudice attributed 
to Hamilton, this second ablest American federal 
financier, after microscopic quest for taint, re- 
ported to the White House that in no respect could 
the Department be improved : and the administra- 
tions not only of Jefferson, but of Madison and 
Monroe, both of the ultimate anti-Hamilton cabal, 
operated from first to last on the silently accepted 
principles and agencies which were born of the 
untiring genius of their erstwhile foe. 

While his final measure for the redemption of 
the public debt was on its passage in the Congress, 
Hamilton laid down his commission and retired 
from public life. It was in 1795. Hamilton was 
38 years of age, a youth upon the calendar, a 
patriarch upon the scrolls of achievement. "He 

' Griswold's American Society, 1855. 

203 



Wtit #reate£ft iamerican 

had been in office nearly six years," wrote Senator 
Lodge in his biography, "and his work was done. 
His opinions and his personahty were indelibly 
impressed upon our frame of government and upon 
our political development. We look in vain for a 
man who, in an equal space of time, has produced 
such direct and lasting effects upon our institutions 
and our history." 

When Hamilton resigned President Washington 
wrote to him as follows:' "In every relation which 
you have borne to me I have foimd that my con- 
fidence in your talents, exertions and integrity has 
been well placed. I the more freely tender this 
testimony of my approbation because I speak from 
opportunities of information which cannot de- 
ceive me and which furnish satisfactory proof of 
your title to public regard." In the light of such 
credentials from Washington, how petty and how 
narrow become the objurgatory libels of such men 
as J. T. Callender, who chose to liken Hamilton to 
Caligula'' and to Alva^ as quoted in Sumner's 
biography.'^ The very depth of Callender's 

' The Writings of George Washington, by Jared Sparks, 1 837. 
" The Prospect Before the United States, by Callender, 1800. 
^ The History of the United States for I7g6, by Callender. 
'' Alexander Hamilton, by Professor William Graham 
Sumner. 

204 



^fje (^reategt American 

hatreds, which included Washington within their 
cloudy horizon, caused him to overshoot his mark; 
for when, as though to complete his indictment, he 
bitterly complained that Hamilton "is the first and 
only favorite whom General Washington ever had," 
posterity leaps to the embrace of that bromidic 
philosophy which would say of Hamilton — "We 
love him for his foes." 

Professor David Kinley in his History of the 
Treasury of the United States refers to Hamilton as 
theman who "established financial order" and who 
"on the soHd foundation of re-estabHshed credit" 
started the country "in the direction of industrial 
and commercial prosperity." He quotes approv- 
ingly the eloquent words of Daniel Webster who 
said of Hamilton years later: "He was made 
Secretary of the Treasury and how he fulfilled the 
duties of such a place, at such a time, the whole 
country perceived with deHght, and the whole world 
saw with admiration. He smote the rock of na- 
tional resources, and abundant streams of revenue 
gushed forth. He touched the dead corpse of the 
public credit, and it sprung upon its feet." 



205 



Jf irsit in Hiterature anb I.att) 

In the arts and in the practice of his chosen, 
private profession, Alexander Hamilton was the 
same comprehensive master that he was in states- 
manship and in finance. In literatiire and law he 
was equally at home. His forensic address, with 
tongue or pen, was hypnotic in its compelling 
sorcery. That his writings earned the highest 
literary status, though dedicated exclusively to 
homilies upon such dry texts as problems in gov- 
ernment afford, is rare testimonial to the culture 
that could clothe such ordinary subjects in extra- 
ordinary purity and charm. In powers of expres- 
sion, in these respects, he was the equal of Presi- 
dent Wilson in oiu* own time — and this is supremely 
suggestive modem parallel. That his address, 
upon the platform, in the forum or before the 
courts, was rich with an impressive eloquence which 
dominated the emotions and the minds of men be- 
neath its spell, is testified alike by his contem- 
porary historians and by the fruits of his appeals. 

206 



Cfie (^reatesit American 

That he could perfect himself to prime recognition 
in the letter and the practice of the law, despite 
the multitude of other diverting responsibilities 
which were alike the burden and the crown of his 
career, bears witness to the native intellect and 
industry which were his endowment. He was and 
is American society's great, outstanding exception 
to that favorite definition which insists that genius 
is merely the ability to do one thing well. 

As a lad, Hamilton's literary genius forced itself 
to early display. One juvenile effort in particular 
has been preserved to posterity as an evidence, in 
the boy of 15, of the talent and predilections in 
this respect which ultimately were to challenge 
the world's applause. I;n 1722 a furious tornado 
swept over the Leeward Islands and wrought ruin 
and desolation amid the West Indies and young 
Hamilton's boyhood home. So terrible was the 
catastrophe that the stoutest hearts were awed. A 
strikingly picturesque and colorful report of the 
hurricane appeared in the public journal of the 
Island of St. Christopher. Its merit was so pro- 
nounced that compelling public inquiry, unsatisfied 
with its anonymous authorship, sought out the 
youth who owned so vivid and inspired a pen and 
decorated him with encomitims prophetic of the 

207 



Wf)t ^vtattit American 

literary laurels to come with the unfolding 
years. 

At the age of 17 he dedicated this pen to the 
cause of American Freedom. When the ablest 
Tory critics collaborated in two pamphlets attack- 
ing the Continental Congress, young Hamilton 
came anonymously to the defense of his distraught 
fellow-patriots with a brilliant answer. It was 
issued in December, 1774, ^-nd was entitled "A 
full vindication of the measures of congress from 
the calimmies of their enemies, in answer to a 
letter imder the signature of a West Chester 
farmer, whereby his sophistry is exposed, his cavils 
confuted, his artifices detected, and his wit ridi- 
culed." A short excerpt from this essay, confessing 
exaggerated, juvenile enthusiasm of expression yet 
showing, clear as crystal, the sturdy American 
philosophies which ruled Hamilton's life, is re- 
ported as follows: "Tell me not of the British 
commons, lords, ministers, ministerial tools, place- 
men, pensioners, parasites — I scorn to let my life 
and property depend upon the pleasure of any of 
them. Give me the steady, imiform, unshaken 
security of constitutional freedom — give me the 
right of trial by a jury of my own neighbors, and to 
be taxed by my own representatives only. What 

208 



Cfje #reatej!t iamerican 

will become of the laws and courts of justice with- 
out this? The shadow may remain, but the sub- 
stance will be gone. I would die to preserve the 
law upon a solid foundation : for, take away liberty, 
and the foundation is destroyed." 

The Tories replied, with special effort to set 
farmers against merchants and thus divide their 
unorganized adversaries. Hamilton again 
promptly rejoined, February, 1775, sixty days 
before the Battle of Lexington, with a second pam- 
phlet of 71 pages entitled, "The farmer refuted; 
or a more comprehensive and impartial view of 
the disputes between Great Britain and the Col- 
onies, intended as a further vindication of the 
Congress." So sensationally and unexpectedly 
vigorous were these rejoinders in their indictment 
of Britain, and so acute the logic with which they 
defended the "natural rights" at the bottom of 
the impending revolt, and so profoimd their apos- 
trophe to justice, their authorship was attributed 
to William Livingston and John Jay by a grateful 
and encouraged people. But it was neither of 
these able patriots who held aloft the lighted torch. 
It was a boy, matured before his time to fit an 
emergency in the tides of men. 

Much of Hamilton's desultory but illuminating 
^4 209 



^f)t i^reatcsit American 

private correspondence during the years of war 
fortunately has been preserved. It reflects his 
constantly growing powers of expression and his 
constantly expanding grasp of new America's prob- 
lem, even as, in its more intimate aspects, it con- 
fesses the warm-hearted humanities that were warp 
and woof to his soul. Incidentally, of course, all 
of Washington's famous letters and papers which 
attracted widespread favor to their author, during 
the entire period of Hamilton's service on his staff, 
were the actual artisanry of the young aide. Fol- 
lowing close upon the heels of this period, Hamilton 
wrote (1781) six papers which, combined in "The 
Continentalist," were an epitomized prologue to 
his subsequent "Federalist." His breadth of 
understanding was now becoming seriously im- 
pressive to his country. Since "The Continental- 
ist," written before the Constitution had been 
framed, is essentially an advance miniature of 
"The Federalist," written in defense of the Con- 
stitution when completed, it may be fairly judged 
from this continuity of thought how amply the Con- 
stitution satisfied Hamilton's basic views: and since 
"The Federalist " has been analyzed at length in an- 
other chapter, it suffices to pass "The Continental- 
ist" with a quotation of its concluding apostrophe. 

210 



Wt^t ^vtattsit American 

"There is something noble and magnificent in 
the perspective of a great, Federal Republic, 
closely linked in the pursuit of a common interest, 
tranquil and prosperous at home, respectable 
abroad, but there is something proportionately 
diminutive and contemptible in the prospect of a 
number of petty states, with the appearance only 
of Union, jarring, jealous, and perverse, without 
any determined direction, fluctuating and unhappy 
at home, weak and insignificant by their dissen- 
sions in the eyes of other nations. . . . Happy 
America if those to whom thou hast intrusted the 
guardianship of thy infancy know how to provide 
for thy future repose, but miserable and undone if 
their negligence or ignorance permits the spirit of 
discord to erect her banners on the ruins of thy 
tranquillity!" 

Truly, in the language of the poet, "his pen be- 
came a clarion ! " From this point on, there are no 
other writings from any other source in the whole 
history of the Revolution's literature, and there- 
after for a quarter of a century, that approach the 
works of Hamilton in conception or expression. 

Writing over the signature of "Phocion" — it 
was the universal habit of the time thus to borrow 
sobriquets— Hamilton issued two vigorous pam- 

211 



^fje i^reatesit American 

phlets in 1784-85 when a storm of post-war venge- 
ance against ex-Tories was sweeping New York 
into indefensible excesses. He never consulted 
expediency when a wrong demanded challenge. 
He was always inspired with a sublime indifference 
to anything but truth and right. He would not 
"keep the word of promise to the ear and break it 
to the hope."' Charlatanism and demagogy he 
abhorred. There never was music to his ears in the 
plaudits of a mistaken mob. These pamphlets 
of "Phocion," done in his usual irrefutable style, 
demanded obedience to law and order and the 
acknowledgment of every Treaty obligation in 
dealings with persons and properties that may 
have served the King. He was unanswerable in 
logic ; wherefore some among his enemies proposed 
to silence him by successive challenges to duels 
imtil he should be killed. But this rash project 
was abandoned. His assassination could not come 
for 20 years, because America, destined to survive, 
could not spare his controlling genius. 

"Phocion's" letters were daring; but as sound 
as they were courageous. They were based upon 
a conception of responsibility in the leadership of 
those important times which distinguishes states- 

' Macbeth. 

212 



manship from politics and which contemplates the 
next generation instead of the next election. 
"Phocion" concluded his final letter, in part, as 
follows : 

"Those who are at present intrusted with power 
in all these infant Republics, hold the most sacred 
deposit that ever was confided to human hands. 
It is with governments as with individuals, first 
impressions and early habits give a lasting bias to 
the temper and character. Our governments 
hitherto have no habits. How important to the 
happiness, not of America alone, but of mankind, 
that they should acquire good ones! If we set 
out with justice, moderation, liberality, and a 
scrupulous regard to the Constitution, the Govern- 
ment will acquire a spirit and tone productive of 
permanent blessings to the community. If, on 
the contrary, the public councils are guided by 
humor, passion and prejudice — if, from resent- 
ment to individuals or a dread of partial incon- 
venience, the Constitution is slighted or explained 
away upon every frivolous pretext — the future 
spirit of government will be feeble, distracted and 
arbitrary. The rights of the subject will be the 
sport of every vicissitude. There will be no 
settled rule of conduct, but every thing will fluctu- 

213 



^f)t 4lreatesft American 

ate with the alternate prevalency of contending 
factions. The world has its eye upon America. 
The noble struggle we have made in the cause of 
liberty, has occasioned a kind of revolution in 
human sentiment. The influence of our example 
has penetrated the gloomy regions of despotism, 
and has pointed the way to inquiries which may 
shake it to its deepest foundations. ... To 
ripen inquiry into action, it remains for us to justify 
the Revolution by its fruits. If the consequences 
prove that we have really asserted the cause of 
human happiness, what may not be expected from 
so illustrious an example? In a greater or less 
degree, the world will bless and imitate. But if 
experience, in this instance, verifies the lesson long 
taught by the enemies of liberty — that the bulk of 
mankind are not fit to govern themselves — that 
they must have a master, and were only made for 
the rein and the spur — we shall then see the final 
triumph of despotism over liberty. The advo- 
cates of the latter must acknowledge it to be an 
ignis fatuus and abandon the pursuit. With the 
greatest advantages for promoting it that ever a 
people had, we shall have betrayed the cause of 
human nature! Let those in whose hands it is 
placed, pause for a moment and contemplate with 

214 



tE^f)e (^vtateit American 

an eye of reverence the vast trust committed to 
them. Let them retire into their own bosoms and 
examine the motives which there prevail!" 

The arts of exhortation never touched a higher 
mark than in these inspired passages. It is easy 
to understand that such leadership was inevitably 
sure to put its trademark upon the conscience 
of the times. Two years after "Phocion" came 
"The Federalist." This tremendous collection of 
patriotic homilies has been treated in detail else- 
where in this volume. The first draft of the first 
paper was prepared in the cabin of a little vessel 
while Hamilton was gliding down the Hudson ; but 
the last echo of the last paper will not die out — 
either as a matter of literature or as a matter of 
law — so long as the American Constitution of which 
it was the supreme contemporary interpretation 
survives. The Edinburgh Review (No. 24) said: 
"The Federalist . . . exhibits an extent and 
precision of information, a profundity of research, 
and an accurateness of understanding, which 
would have done honor to the most illustrious 
statesman of ancient or modem times." Black- 
wood's Magazine, four decades later' said: "It is a 
work altogether which, for comprehensiveness of 

' January, 1825. 

215 



design, strength, clearness and simplicity, has no 
parallel. We do not even except or overlook 
Montesquieu and Aristotle among the writings 
of men." Beside such compliments as these my 
own observations are absolved of extravagance. 
As regards legal scope and value in "The Federal- 
ist," there could be no more superlative praise 
than that pronounced by the greatest of all Ameri- 
can jurists. Chief Justice Marshall of the United 
States Supreme Court, who referred to "The 
Federalist" in deciding the case of Cohens vs. 
Virginia as follows : "It is a complete commentary 
on our Constitution, and is appealed to by all 
parties in the questions to which that instrimient 
has given birth. ' ' When these words were uttered, 
Madison's journal had not yet been published, 
disclosing an authentic record of the debates in 
the Constitutional Convention. But the subse- 
quent appearance of this other great reference 
authority does not dilute the force of Justice 
Marshall's compliment because, within the pres- 
ent generation, a great modern jurist, whose name 
I am not at liberty to quote, has made similar 
acknowledgment to me in no less certain language. 
"'The Federalist' has come to stand on our 
shelves, next to the Constitution, as the first great 

216 



^fie ^ttattut i^merican 

text-book upon it," another authority has written. ' 
Says another competent historian:^ "It holds the 
same high place in American literature which the 
letters of Junius and the reflections of Burke on 
the French Revolution, occupy in British litera- 
ture. . . . Shortly after its first appearance, it 
was translated into French by M. Buisson, and 
published in Paris. In that country it has taken 
its place by the side of Montesquieu's Spirit of 
Laws. It has been republished in Switzerland, 
and has been there honored as the worthy asso- 
ciate of the great work of Burlamaqui on the same 
subject. It is known and appreciated in every 
country of Europe, just in proportion as the liberty 
of the press and liberty of speech are possessed and 
enjoyed." In a word, borrowing still another ac- 
knowledged authority^ "The Federalist" was "a 
literary montiment great enough for any man and 
any nation." 

In 1793 Hamilton's virile and unconquerable 
pen faced another critical task. The excitable 

^ Alexander Hamilton, by Professor William Graham 
Sumner. 

^ Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Samuel H. 
Schmucker, 1856. 

^Essays, Historical and Literary, Vol. I, by John Fiske. 

217 



Wi)t (Sreatesft i^metican 

affections of mass Americans who loved France, 
plus the equally inflammable hatreds nursed 
toward England, made the enforcement of Wash- 
ington's proclamation of neutrality delicately diffi- 
cult when this erstwhile friend and foe locked in 
war's embrace. Strong men opposed it vigorously. 
It had been Hamilton's idea, accepted by Wash- 
ington in preference to Jefferson's desire to fling 
the whole prickly mess into an extra session of the 
Congress. Madison declared it injurious to "the 
national honor by seeming to disregard the stipu- 
lated duties to France" and said it would woujid 
"the popular feelings by seeming indifference to 
the cause of liberty." Jefferson called it an 
"English neutrality." Citizen Genet, coming 
from a commune in which government was but a 
parody, presumed that he was entitled to harangue 
Americans, regardless of the posture of or license 
from their government. The situation was fraught 
with menace, within and without. But Washing- 
ton and Hamilton were determined that the United 
States should stand free from foreign entangle- 
ments that might incline our destiny to the vicissi- 
tudes of European war and politics. It was not 
that they loved France less or favored England. 
Rather it was that they loved America more, and 

218 



Wf)t ^rtSLttsit American 

scorned the French Revolution's trend from liberty 
to wanton anarchy. To defend this mighty policy 
so prophetic in the precedent it set for the benefit 
of American political isolation for a century to 
follow, Hamilton again unlimbered the batteries 
of his prolific, burning essays. Now he wrote as 
"Pacificus," defending neutrality and the whole 
foreign policy which had brought down radical 
anathema upon President Washington's head. 
These letters, writes a brilliant critic,' "apart 
from their special argument on the facts, will ever 
remain a classic of wise, dignified, illusionless, 
unprocative statesmanship." They functioned 
admirably -to challenge the sober second thought 
of thinking men and were the great expression of 
the first great foreign policy laid down for the con- 
duct of the United States. They were followed 
by the letters of " Americanus" in February, 1794, 
in not unsimilar vein; "Horatius" in 1795, and 
then by ''Camillus," writing his famous defense 
of the inflammable Jay Treaty with England. 
Never, except when he wrote "The Federalist," 
had Hamilton pleaded a more difficult cause or 
faced greater obstacles. Yet, never did he write 
with more inspired success. ' ' Camillus ' ' consisted 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

219 



W^t (Greatest American 

of forty letters, occupying not less than one hun- 
dred newspaper columns. Thirty- two were writ- 
ten, and all were inspired, by Hamilton. The 
remaining eight were the contribution of Rufus 
King. Modern commentators will marvel that 
the public mind could be held to such exhaustive 
and profound analysis as the letters of "Camil- 
lus" represent. It is a demonstration of the high 
order of mass intelligence which prevailed in col- 
onial America. To-day "Camillus" would find 
audience only in some erudite review with a read- 
ing circle limited to careful students of structural 
government and the science of public relations. 
We are too far removed from the travail which 
gave our blessed institutions birth to be intent, 
as a mass, upon our public studies. It was differ- 
ent then; and Hamilton was without a rival in 
these arts of controversy. The letters of ''Camil- 
lus" remain today as our most powerful message 
against "government by weak and vague words; 
against the policy of drift, which possesses neither 
the courage to foresee results nor the energy to 
prepare for them; against those people, arguing 
interminably to delay action, who grudge every 
sacrifice whether its object be peace or war, and 
who denounce with the same cantankerous 

220 



hostility all preparations as aggressive and all 
concessions as cowardice."' 

The final and crowning tribute to Hamilton's 
genius as a prophet and an inspired scribe is 
Washington's Farewell Address. This sublime 
valedictory — the parting admonition of a Father 
to his children — has lived with the Declaration of 
Independence as one of the richest admonitory 
inheritances bequeathed to posterity by the his- 
tory of America's foundation. Though times and 
conditions and necessities, at home and abroad, 
have changed with the crowding years, Washing- 
ton's Farewell Address remains constant in the 
wisdom and the utility of its wholesome creeds. 
It is often remarked that nothing else so eloquently 
testifies to the mental stature of the men who put 
down America's foundations as this continuous 
timeliness in the sage and lofty words with which 
Washington bade his countrymen an official adieu. 
It takes nothing from Washington's sure, safe pos- 
ture in America's historical affections to concede 
that the actual authorship of this immortal docu- 
ment was the work of Hamilton. Such was the 
indisputable fact. 

When Washington was drawing to the end of 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

221 



^f}e (^teatesit American 

his forty -five years of mighty service to the country 
he had led from bondage, Hamilton suggested 
to him the idea of a final message of composite 
counsel. The President promptly approved the 
fortunate suggestion. Never did the instincts 
of two men run in closer or more constant 
harmony. Washington sketched the headings 
under which he would desire to group his observa- 
tions and requested Hamilton, as was his tradi- 
tional custom in such circumstances, to prepare 
the draft. Mrs. Hamilton has testified in a letter 
dated August 7, 1840,' that her husband read 
practically the entire address to her; that when 
it had been submitted to Washington for his 
approval and returned for final revision, it had 
been accepted verbatim with the exception of 
a single paragraph of five lines. Thus it was deliv- 
ered to the ages on September 19, 1796. It lives 
as a monument to Washington. But it deserves 
equally to stand as a monimient to the intellectual 
giant who sponsored and prepared its text."" The 

' Reported in The Conqueror, by Gertrude Atherton. 

^ Washington Irving' s Life oj Washington says, in part, 
upon this subject: "It appears from these communications 
(between Washington and Hamilton) that the President, 
both in sending him (Hamilton) a rough draft of the docu- 
ment and at previous dates, requested him to prepare such 

222 ■ 



Wi)c (^reategt American 

spirit of the Address belongs equally to both be- 
cause both had been life collaborators in the 
experiences, the labors, the sacrifices and the con- 
clusions which the Address personified. "But 
what gives it a universal value and places it per- 
manently in the literature of the world, is the mind 
of Hamilton and not the character of Washington. 
It is no disparagement to the fame of one who was 
a great soldier and a wise ruler to deny him a fur- 
ther reward to which he himself would never have 
laid claim."' Most historical commentators con- 
tent themselves with a formula which inconspicu- 
ously observes that Washington sought Hamilton's 
"criticism" of the address and that its ultimate 
appearance followed "much revision by both."^ 

an address as he thought would be appropriate to the occa- 
sion; that Washington consulted him particularly, and most 
minutely, on many points connected with it; and that at 
different times General Hamilton did forward to The Presi- 
dent three drafts of such a paper. The first was sent back 
to him with suggestions for its correction and enlargement; 
from the second draft, thus altered and improved, the manu- 
script now printed may be supposed to have been prepared 
by Washington, and transmitted for final examination to 
General Hamilton and Judge Jay; and with it, the third 
draft was returned to the President and may probably yet 
be found among his papers." 

* Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

^ Harvard Classics, Vol. 43. 

223 



But any close student of the inimitable writings of 
"Publius," "Pacificus" and "Camillus" will con- 
sent that the testimony of Hamilton's widow is 
correct. Their pen wrote the Farewell Address 
and water-marked it with an atmosphere, a culture 
and a facility of phrase which is as undeniable in 
source as though the confession were openly ac- 
knowledged in a postscript. Three solemn warn- 
ings are uttered in the Farewell Address: first, 
against any weakening of the Union; second, 
against the growth of faction ; third, against foreign 
entanglements. These philosophies were basic in the 
common doctrines of both Washington and Hamil- 
ton. Together they bequeathed them to grateful 
posterity. But from the beginning to the end, 
Hamilton was their supreme oracle and tribune. 
The Farewell Address is Washington's: but first 
of all it is the soul of Alexander Hamilton. 



The story of Hamilton, the lawyer, is one more 
repetition of prodigy. Likewise, it is repetition of 
the proofs that even in this private profession, 
he was first and always the good citizen, the faith- 
ful friend, the dependable patriot. From still an- 
other angle, we glimpse the sterling mark in the 

224 



Wi)t (^reatesit ^mtxitmx 

character and genius of this rare American whose 
diversity of talents and services rendered defies 
successful competition in any age, in any land. 

Hamilton was admitted to the bar when he was 
twenty -five years of age. For four intensive 
months he concentrated his uncannily retentive 
mind upon a legal education and qualified for an 
attorney's license which no less brilliant a mental- 
ity than that of Aaron Burr could not justify 
at the same examinations, though favored with 
two years of study. Indeed, Burr's ultimate, fatal 
and insatiate jealousy of Hamilton may be traced 
to seeds that rooted in this legal kindergarten 
in Albany in 1782. Hamilton's achievement 
astounded the legal profession, composed at that 
time largely of exceptional men, and prophesied 
the subsequent leadership which gave him unques- 
tioned pre-eminence among the practitioners of 
his maturer years. The final preliminary compli- 
ment to his profound faculties lay in his publication 
of a Manual on the Practice of Law immediately 
upon his admission to the bar. 

One year later he removed to New York and 
devoted three uninterrupted years to the practice 
of his much-loved profession. Fate afforded him 
prompt opportunity to vindicate his life-long doe- 
's 225 



tlTfje i^reatesit American 

trines that the Law and the Cottrts must take 
counsel of Justice only, regardless of passing preju- 
dice or passion which might dictate expedient sub- 
mission to the temper of the mob. On the heels 
of victory over Britain came a storm of hostility to 
all Tory interests in the Colonies. In direct con- 
travention of the Treaty of Peace, this greed for 
vengeance lured the New York legislature into 
passing a Trespass Act which gave a right of ac- 
tion to those whose property had been occupied 
during the war by adherents of the British Crown. 
A test case, clothed in all the favorite aspects of 
sentiment alism, involved action, imder this statute, 
by a poor widow who sued a rich ex-Tory mer- 
chant. All the passion of the throng leaped to 
embrace the widow's cause. It became the ready 
vehicle for their vendetta. Refusing, as always, 
to surrender his principles to itinerant clamor, 
Hamilton argued the defense. He lifted the issue 
above the little faction of the fleeting hour and 
cast it upon the higher planes of justice, the honor 
of the courts, the sanctity of obligation and the 
integrity of treaties. In a master's argument he 
won the case. That anger which rises always 
from the defeated appetites of wrath, stormed for 
a hectoring period about the judges and their im- 

226 



^fje ^xtattit American 

popular decree. But the institution of the courts 
was vindicated, a dangerous trend was stemmed, 
and Hamilton's eminence as an advocate was fixed. 

Of Hamilton during this period Charles Warren, 
in his fine treatise on the American Bar, ' has said: 
"The leadership of the Bar was generally assigned 
to Alexander Hamilton. . . . From the date of 
his first great case of Rutgers vs. Waddington, in 
1784, until his appointment as Secretary of the 
Treasury in 1789, his legal fame was pre-eminent." 

It remained for Hamilton to clinch this legal 
eminence impregnably — and, at the same time, to 
render unto America his greatest legal service — 
upon the occasion of his establishment of the Na- 
tional Bank of the United States. The opposition 
to this central banking plan denied the right of the 
Government, under the Constitution, to erect a 
national bank. Hamilton promptly invoked the 
implied powers of the Constitution to sustain his 
project. His ultimate success not only saved the 
Bank, but it led to the promulgation of the general 
doctrine of "implied powers" which has since be- 
come so formidable and so essential a factor in 
American judicial interpretation that it has been 
aptly called "the chief dynamic principle of our 

' A History of the American Bar, by Charles Warren. 

227 



^^t <^reate£ft American 

Constitution." When Hamilton wrote "The 
Federalist," he penned a creed which has come to 
have the reference authority of statutes and court 
decisions in determining moot points of Constitu- 
tional law. When he wrote his argument, and 
submitted it to Washington, on the constitution- 
ality of the National Bank, he marshalled for the 
first time the principle of liberal construction and 
for the first time established this doctrine of "im- 
plied powers" — "the most formidable weapon in 
the armory of the Constitution."' Judge Story 
pronounced Hamilton's effort in this respect "one 
of the most masterly disquisitions that ever pro- 
ceeded from the mind of man." Hamilton argued 
that if nothing could be done that was not ex- 
pressly described and authorized, the Constitution 
could never fit the unforeseen needs of an expand- 
ing Union. He insisted that the Constitution was 
not a straight -jacket for the strangulation of pro- 
gress. He declared that the Constitution was, 
and was meant to be, a mere outline of intent ; and 
that it must be conceded any essential and impro- 
hibited authority to make these intentions effec- 
tive. Thirty years later this same specific 
question of "implied powers," as related to a 

' Life of Hamilton, by Senator Lodge. 

228 



Wf)t (^reatesit American 

federal bank, was adjudicated in the United States 
Supreme Court. In the famous case of McCulloch 
vs. Maryland, Chief Justice Marshall, the greatest 
jurist in the story of the nation, sustained every 
contention Hamilton had ever stressed as a pioneer 
in these particulars, and reached his conclusions 
by a process of reasoning precisely reminiscent of 
Hamilton's great argimient. "The able and lumi- 
nous decision of the Chief Justice adds nothing to 
the argimient of the Secretary and takes nothing 
from it, nor is the work of the latter inferior to the 
opinion of the Judge in clearness and force of 
expression," wrote Senator Lodge in his Life of 
Hamilton. Justice Marshall himself said "that 
there was nothing in the whole field of argimient 
which had not been brought forward by Hamilton 
in his letter to Washington." 

Hamilton often in his life-time was discussed as 
eligible for appointment as Chief Justice of the 
Supreme Court. His memorandum on the doc- 
trine of "implied powers" demonstrates to what 
profound extent he possessed capacities and talents 
suited to such responsibility. In the rush of other 
hard-pressing matters, he dashed off a constitu- 
tional doctrine upon which great political parties 
have since risen and divided, and around which 

229 



Wi)t ^ttattit American 

the internal contests of a century have been fought. 
But the doctrine, born of Hamilton, remains as 
fundamental to American institutions as is the 
Constitution itself. 

* ' Whatever difference of opinion may have existed 
as to the share of Hamilton in framing the Constitu- 
tion," wrote Lewis Henry Boutell in a privately 
printed essay, ' "it has never been questioned that 
amongst the ablest of its expounders, he was the 
chief." 

When Hamilton laid down his heavy public re- 
sponsibilities to which he had devoted himself 
with perfect, unselfish singleness of purpose he 
returned to New York to recuperate his broken 
personal fortimes. For years he had dedicated 
himself and all his resources to his country. He 
had given not only to his coimtry, but also he had 
been prodigally generous of time and money to all 
his friends and countrymen who sought his aid. 
He was practically without funds. He had es- 
tablished his country's solvency, but he had 
neglected his own. He had exhausted all his sav- 
ings and faced the necessity of redeeming a fiscal 
credit for himself which he had besought thereto- 
fore only for his beloved Republic. He returned 

* Alexander Hamilton, the Constructive Statesman. 

230 



tBf)t i&vtsittit l^merican 

to the city of his home and plunged into the prac- 
tice of his profession. It is said of him that 
though he confronted most lucrative opportimity, 
he never could be persuaded to accept anything 
beyond a reasonable and modest fee, and that he 
often refused to make any charge at all against 
poor clients. As a result, at his death he could 
leave his family little in worldly goods ; but he left 
them a fame and a name which stood as high in the 
practice of the law as it did in that multitude of 
other fields in which he was the acknowledged 
miaster. 

That Hamilton immediately stepped again to 
the head of a brilliant bar, when he returned to 
his practice, all the records left us clearly testify. 
Whether confronting court or jury, he was irresist- 
ibly powerful in analysis and appeal. Indeed, 
the popular imagination was so dominated by his 
professional genius that men came to think his 
appearance in a case pre-ordained its victory. It 
was not alone that he was the mightiest orator of 
his era — felicitously familiar with every speaking 
art. Nor was it alone that he was the most unan- 
swerable logician who ever drew a brief. Behind 
his power was a compelling personality which 
ignored the natural handicaps of a short and un- 

231 



^Ije ^xtatt^t ilmerican 

impressive stature and conquered men by the 
sheer dynamics of his mind and character. His 
dark, deep-set eyes were coals of fire when he was 
aroused. His massive, finely shaped head, with 
its close-set mouth and its firm, square jaw, seemed 
to communicate a sense of confidence and convic- 
tion to all who faced him in an appeal. It was not 
only the influence of a strong nature, it was like- 
wise the soul of an impeccably honest man which 
challenged dominion. It was his relentless fidelity 
to his trusts — exemplified, finally, by the fact that 
he devoted the last days of his life to concluding 
the business of his clients, rather than in com- 
posing his own affairs. But always, at the root, 
was a knowledge of the law and a natural in- 
terpretive talent which gave him perfect com- 
mand of every situation which he undertook to 
govern. 

There could be no higher authority upon a mat- 
ter of this character than famous Chancellor James 
Kent, the great American jurist who conspicu- 
ously served New York State in various vital 
capacities throughout Hamilton's period and for 
many years thereafter. His judicial attainments 
won for him a permanent place in the estimates of 
both America and England and his judgments in 

232 



^i)t ^reatesit American 

chancery law covered such a wide range of topics 
and were so throughly considered and developed as 
unquestionably to form the basis of American 
equity jurisprudence. Kent said of Hamilton, 
whom he warmly admired: 

''Among all his brethren, Colonel Hamilton was 
indisputably pre-eminent. This was imiversally 
conceded. He rose at once to loftiest heights of 
professional eminence by his profound penetration, 
his power of analysis, the comprehensive grasp 
and strength of his understanding, and the firm- 
ness, frankness and superiority of his character. 
. . . He was employed in every . . . impor- 
tant case. . . . He taught us all how to probe 
deeply into the hidden recesses of the science, or to 
follow up principles to their far distant sources. 
. . . Although the New York Bar could at that 
time boast of the clear intellect, the candor, the 
simplicity and black-letter learning of the elder 
Jones, the profound and richly varied learning of 
Harrison, the classical taste and elegant accom- 
plishments of Brockholst Livingston, the solid 
and accurate, but unpretending, common law 
learning of Troup, the chivalrous feelings and 
dignified address of Pendleton, yet the mighty 
mind of Hamilton would at times bear down all 

233 



opposition by its comprehensive grasp and the 
strength of his reasoning powers. . . . We may 
say of him, in reference to his associates, as was 
said of Papinian ; ' Omnes longo post se intervallo 
reHquerit.'" 

We have an even more concrete expression from 
Kent, commenting on Hamilton's conduct in the 
famous Croswell case, which may be cited as typify- 
ing Hamilton's labors at the bar. Croswell was 
the editor of an obscure Federalist journal which 
charged that Jefferson had paid Callender to 
slander Washington and Adams. The same charge 
had appeared in other larger and more substantial 
journals, but Croswell was picked by Democratic 
leaders, bent upon curbing the stinging attacks 
of their adversaries, as the man of whom an ex- 
ample could most easily be made for the benefit of 
its effect upon the entire Federalist press. With 
palpable disregard for the rights of the defendant, 
Croswell was prosecuted for libel, before a Demo- 
cratic Judge, on an indictment handed down by a 
Democratic Grand Jury. Croswell's counsel asked 
for time to bring witnesses from Virginia to testify 
to the truth of the alleged libel ; but the prejudicial 
court held that the jury were judges only of the 
fact and not of the truth or intent of the publica- 

234 



tlTfje (^reatcjft American 

tion. The prosecution was pushed relentlessly 
and Croswell convicted. Immediately a new trial 
was sought on the ground of misinstructions by 
the court. The issue raised the great question of 
general verdicts on which Erskine won his renown 
and stemmed the tide of reactionary violence in 
London. ' It attracted Hamilton not only as a 
lawyer, but as the traditional friend of a free press. 
He went to Albany to make the principal argu- 
ment in Croswell's behalf before the Supreme 
Court. He spoke for six hours, laying down the 
principle that ' ' the liberty of the press consists in 
the right to publish with impimity truth with good 
motives and for justifiable ends, whether it respects 
government, magistracy, or individuals." He not 
only won his case, but elicited from Chancellor 
Kent the following observations which are pre- 
served in the notes which this eminent jurist made 
at the famous hearing. Wrote Kent : 

"It was the greatest forensic effort Hamilton 
ever made. He had bestowed unusual attention on 
the case, and he came prepared to discuss the 
points of law with a perfect mastery of the subject. 
There was an imusual solemnity and earnestness 
on his part in the discussion. He was, at times, 

* Life of Hamilton, by Senator Lodge. 

235 



^fje (^reatejst J^merican 

highly impassioned and pathetic. His whole soul 
was enlisted in the cause. The aspect of the times 
was portentous, and he was persuaded that if he 
could overthrow the high-toned doctrine of the 
judge, it would be a great gam to the liberties of 
this country. . . . The anxiety and tenderness 
of his feelings, and the gravity of his theme, ren- 
dered his reflections exceedingly impressive. He 
never before in my hearing made any effort in 
which he commanded higher reverence for his 
principles nor equal admiration for the power and 
pathos of his eloquence." 

Tributes like these, from Kent, to Hamilton's 
genius as a lawyer are as final in their verdicts as 
are tributes, from Washington and Lafayette, to 
Hamilton's abilities as a soldier. His resource- 
ful power with juries is typified, in legal history 
and legend, by the story of the Croucher case. 
Croucher, a low, dissolute fellow, was chief witness 
against a young mechanic of good character whom 
Hamilton was defending against a charge of having 
murdered his sweetheart. It was well on toward 
midnight when Croucher's cross-examination be- 
gan. With a latitude of practice which we may 
not now understand, Hamilton sent for two candles 
and placed them one at each side of the witness 

236 



Klit i^teatesit American 

box, throwing Croucher's face into bold but ghastly 
relief. "I have special reasons," he observed, 
"deep reasons, reasons that, when the real culprit is 
detected and placed before the court, will then be 
understood." Amid a silence which was more 
penetrating than the roll of thunder, expectant 
eyes riveted themselves upon the man whom 
Hamilton so boldly challenged. "The jury will 
mark every muscle of his face," Hamilton con- 
tinued ominously, "every motion of his eyes. I 
conjure you to look through this man's counte- 
nance to his conscience." Then, with piercing 
gaze and rapid fire, Hamilton flting his embattled 
questions upon the distraught witness. Croucher 
soon broke under the driving pressure of circum- 
stance and quiz. He was soon tangled in a hope- 
less skein of contradictions. He was soon stripped 
of every pretense and left as criminally naked as 
was Hamilton's prophecy and aim. The jury 
acquitted Hamilton's client without leaving its 
bench and Croucher slimk away to prove by sub- 
sequent crimes the justification for Hamilton's 
attack upon his credibility. 

The only occasion upon which Hamilton ap- 
peared as a lawyer in the Supreme Court of the 
United States was in 1786, in the case of Hylton 

237 



tBi)t (f^teatesft American 

vs. United States. Of Hamilton's argument, Judge 
Iredell wrote, February 26, 1796:' 

"The day before yesterday Mr. Hamilton spoke 
in our court attended by the most crowded audi- 
ence I ever saw there, both Houses of Congress 
being almost deserted upon the occasion." 

Such was the hold Hamilton had upon the 
imagination and the respect of his time. The mere 
suggestion of his presence sufficed to make his 
forum the constant magnet for intellectual throngs. 
Continues Judge Iredell: "Though he was in very 
ill health, he spoke with astonishing ability, and in 
a most pleasing manner, and was listened to with 
the profoimdest attention. His speech lasted 
about three hours." A contemporary newspaper 
accoimt stated: "The whole of his argument was 
clear, impressive and classical. The audience 
which was very numerous and among whom were 
many foreigners of distinction and many of the 
members of Congress, testified the effect produced 
by the talents of this great orator and statesman." 



If Hamilton had been nothing more than author, 

orator and lawyer — dominating, as he did, the life 

' Life and Letters of James Iredell, by Griffith J. McRee. 

238 



tE^fje (Creates!! Ilmerican 

of his country in respect of all these arts for twenty 
years — he would have been one of the supreme 
products of American life and opporttmity, without 
reference to any other fields of labor and of service. 
The fame of many an American idol rests upon less 
achievement in some of these culttiral pursuits 
than Hamilton registered in all of them. What, 
then, shall be the place accorded him when it is 
realized that his oratory, his literature and law 
were but the by-products of his life, secondary to 
other aims and other fundamental undertakings ! 



239 



dTfje (great ^olbier 

A GREAT majority of the world's heroes have 
been soldiers. It seems to have been human na- 
ture's habit to abhor war, but no more intensely 
than to canonize war's chieftains. The martial 
glamour has always monopolized applause . Carly le 
would explain it as the result of man's "gregarious, 
purblind nature, prompting him to run, as dim- 
eyed animals do, towards any glittering object, 
were it but a scoured tankard, and mistake it for a 
solar limiinary." A more reasonable exegesis 
would be that so long as we are moved by himian 
passions, we shall yield first appreciation to those 
naked virtues of physical and moral bravery and 
sacrifice and potential martyrdom which are the 
battle-field's reversion. Be the reason what it 
may, the fact remains. It is habitual that a na- 
tion's great should be her soldiers. It is particu- 
larly striking, therefore, that American history 
should award imperishable fame to Alexander 
Hamilton as a non-military man in the midst of a 

240 



^f)t SvtHttit American 

military era. Yet, by the same token, it completes 
his eligibility to register the fact that his military 
prowess was scarcely less pronounced than his civil 
triumphs. The circumstance that his high stand- 
ing as a soldier has been swallowed up in his stand- 
ing as a statesman and a publicist, and practically 
forgotten, is highest tribute to his civil record; 
first, because he was a great soldier; second, be- 
cause, as stated, the battle-torch usually out- 
shines the student-lamp in historical illuminations. 
The truth nevertheless is that, by every martial 
test, he was a military genius. The truth is that 
if he had not erected so many civil monuments to 
his career's utility, his military record would have 
stood out in bold relief and committed Hamilton, 
the soldier, to the veneration of American posterity. 
From the first moment that Hamilton made his 
prophetic decision that the American war for inde- 
pendence was inevitable, he applied his trenchant 
zeal to preparing himself for a leader's role in the 
approaching battle drama. Because his brains 
were deemed more valuable to the revolution than 
his body, he had short chance at spectacular ex- 
ploit ere he was attached to Washington's head- 
quarters. Throughout the period, however, the 
acknowledged fact is that he was a shining star of 
'6 241 



tEf)t ^xtattit American 

courage, utterly oblivious to danger and perpetu- 
ally inspiring to his rugged troops upon every 
occasion which permitted active service: also that 
he was a brilliant strategist and tactician, and the 
constant, helpful, dependable confidant of great 
commanders in all the martial crises of the nation's 
early life. But it was the constant regret of his 
revolutionary years that he could not be spared 
from larger military tasks to lead men more often 
into conflict. He longed always for the "front- 
line trench" because he scorned safety for himself 
when human lives were needed on the altars of his 
country. 

No sooner did the clouds of Lexington and 
Bunker Hill pall the colonial horizon than Hamil- 
ton flung himself with avid resolution into the 
"Hearts of Oak," a corps of New York volunteers, 
whose leathern caps read "Freedom or Death." 
Swiftly he proved his mettle; and when the New 
York Convention ordered that a company of artil- 
lery be raised, Hamilton qualified as Captain. He 
was commissioned March 14, 1776, at the age of 
nineteen, a man among men as tested by the hard- 
est standards known to human intercourse. A 
liberal portion of the last remittance he received 
from the generous friends back in his old island - 

242 




The first meeting between George Washington and Hamilton 
From the picture by Chappell 



home, he appropriated to the recruiting and equip- 
ping of his company. He had no resource which 
he did not dedicate to his America. His command 
was soon conspicuous for excellence. It attracted 
the attention of General Greene, whom Hamilton 
later declared to have been the first soldier of the 
Revolution. This good opinion was reciprocated. 
Indeed, it was Greene who introduced Hamilton 
to Washington — the most momentous juncture in 
the story of the nation — the threshold of a partner- 
ship which carried American freedom on its shoul- 
ders through twenty years of critical decision. 
That Hamilton was a brilliant soldier did not 
wait long for proofs. Mars baptized him on one 
of the bloodiest battle-fields of the Revolution. 
The Declaration of Independence at last had stirred 
the reluctant Howe to British action. The clash 
came with dawn of August 28, 1776, in the Battle 
of Long Island. Hamilton's valiant artillery was 
in the thick of sanguinary contact up to the hour 
when Washington determined upon that masterly 
retreat which won him world credit as a strategist 
equal no less to salvaging defeat than to plotting 
victory. Then it fell to Hamilton to bring up the 
rear — perilous, exacting, desperate responsibility— 
and he achieved Washington's perfect confidence 

243 



tirte ^ttattfit American 

in this single enterprise. Could anything more 
spectacular typify the military genius of America 
than such a feat performed with such endorsement 
— at nineteen years of age? 

At White Plains, Hamilton's little battery bore 
the brunt of Howe's attack on Chatterton's Hill 
and held back the Hessians for deadly hours. If 
resourcefulness in face of peril marks the martial 
master, who shall deny credentials to this slender 
youth, standing his smoking cannon on end and 
filling them with musket balls when his round shot 
were exhausted? 

Down through New Jersey swung the hard- 
pressed Continentals. Still it was Hamilton's 
decimated troop that held the rear. Liberty's 
spirit was trying out the souls of men. Finally 
came that historic Christmas immortalized in 
picture and in story — when Washington crossed 
the ice-choked Delaware, surprised Trenton and 
won the first great battle for the new world's 
emancipation. Hamilton and his little band, re- 
duced from 91 to 25 men, were among the first 
chosen for this desperate adventure. They shared 
the honor of a glorious triimiph even as they con- 
tributed immeasurably to its accomplishment. 
Quickly came another victory at Princeton. Again 

244 



^fje (^reatesit American 

Hamilton was Washington's reliance. Again he 
proved his sterling military worth. And not yet 
had the sun risen on his twentieth birthday morn ! 

General Washington now drafted Hamilton for 
higher works. The diversity of talents which he 
had by now displayed, leaving doubtful whether 
his pen or his sword was the mightier, recom- 
mended him for a post of delicate and meridian re- 
sponsibility, that of Aide and Military Secretary 
to the Commander-in-Chief, with rank of Lieuten- 
ant-Colonel. It was an invitation to an intimacy 
of relations with Washington and to an implicity 
of confidence which was a greater decoration than 
any Government could give. None but a gallant 
soldier of dauntless and demonstrated intrepidity 
could thus have been elevated to Washington's 
high companionship without an unhealthy reflex 
in the jealousies of other men. Regardless of 
Secretarial capacities and literary reputation, 
Washington could not have raised Hamilton to the 
key-position on his Staff, except as he had im- 
pressed the whole Army with his bravery and 
genius. That the invitation was ever given, and 
then that its acceptance met with universal ac- 
claim, is the last word in proof of Hamilton's 
battle-courage and standing among fighting men. 

245 



Hamilton was reluctant to leave the lines where 
he had made such progress. He wanted to win his 
way to high command in active contact with 'the 
foe. He knew the war would last for years and he 
was confident that ere final victory befell, he would 
ride as a General ; and, despite his youth, which was 
no barrier to progress and precocity in other 
theaters of life, who shall deny that there was every 
probability of exactly such event, if he were not 
killed in some exploit of reckless daring, as when he 
volunteered to recover Fort Washington by storm? 
But great as he was and would have been as a com- 
bat soldier, he contributed vastly more to the suc- 
cess of Revolutionary arms by becoming counsellor, 
confidant, spokesman and first friend to General 
Washington. His duties were varied, but always 
of critical importance. He assumed complete re- 
sponsibility for all of Washington's voliiminous 
correspondence, and most of the letters, reports and 
proclamations which issued from Washington's 
headquarters and which testified to the luminous 
intellect of Washington, came from his fertile 
brain. "The pen of our Army," said the brave 
Troup, "was held by Hamilton; and for dignity of 
manner, pith of matter, and elegance of style, 
General Washington's letters are unrivaled in 

246 



^f)t <^reatefl!t !3merican 

military annals." This observation does not in- 
tend the absurd idolatry which would take all 
credit from the Commander and transfer it to his 
Aide. This is not a Baconian-Shakespearian con- 
troversy. But neither does this observation in- 
tend that the Aide shall be submerged in the 
adulation due his Chief. The truth is that credits 
must divide. Decisions were Washington's pre- 
rogative; but the incisive, unanswerable logic in 
which they were clothed, was the art of the Scholar 
of the Revolution. Furthermore, no one can know 
to what extent "The Little Lion," as Hamilton 
was now known among his Army friends, partici- 
pated in and helped to shape decisions. But one 
may reasonably believe that Washington's later 
acknowledged habit of depending upon Hamilton, 
almost as upon an oracle, traced its roots to these 
days when battle was the business of all men. 

While Washington was suffering defeat at 
Brandy wine and Germantown, Gates was vic- 
torious at Saratoga in the north. A desperate 
crisis had arrived. Unless Washington received 
re-enforcements from Gates, his next contact with 
the enemy was sure to be his last. To order these 
re-enforcements, by exercise of sheer, superior 
authority, was a substantial hazard because Gates, 

247 



^f)t <^reates;t jamerican 

vain, weak and ambitious, was the idol of the 
north and east, thanks to the happy circumstance 
of the surrender of Burgoyne, and he was inevi- 
tably sure to be resentful, if not actually defiant, 
toward peremptory draft from General Head- 
quarters. The delicacy of the situation was sub- 
sequently demonstrated by the famous "Conway 
Cabal" which later sought actually to supersede 
Washington with Gates in supreme American com- 
mand. The achievement of the necessary result, 
however, was imperative. The issue of war himg 
upon the success of a military diplomat. Hamil- 
ton, not yet of age, was commissioned to the 
emergency. How well he performed it is history. 
Without once disclosing the final letter of command 
which he held back as a last resort, Hamilton, 
after a long, hard joiuney overland, met Gates, 
beat down his hostility and hesitation, overcame 
barriers of pride and pique and even of intrigue, 
and sent Washington more men than the great 
Commander had even dared to ask. The un- 
stinted gratitude which this supreme soldier show- 
ered upon his yoimg Aide's head may well be 
reflected in a modem veneration all too little 
evidenced. 

Hamilton was at Washington's side through 

248 



Wi)t ^vtattit Mmtxitsin 

the unspeakable griefs and sufferings of Valley 
Forge. He was with him at Monmouth Court 
House and displayed a typical impetuosity of 
courage in checking Lee's disgraceful retreat. He 
was with him in each of the tumbling crises which 
constantly beset the Revolutionary cause — always 
sustaining hope, aways challenging an emulation 
of his faiths and works. He was in close contact 
with the disclosure of Arnold's treason at West 
Point. He was in the heat of every battle in which 
Washington himself engaged. Through it all he 
played a striking r61e; but through it all was a con- 
stant revulsion against the fates that forced him to 
forego combat leadership because of his indispensa- 
bility in other lines. 

"Almost from the outset Washington consulted 
Hamilton more frequently than the other members 
of his staff and intrusted the most weighty affairs 
to his charge," the great historian, Fiske, has writ- 
ten. ' "It was remarkable that this preference, 
accorded to so young a man, should have excited 
no jealousy. But the 'little lion,' as the older 
officers called him, was so frank and so good-na- 
tured, so buoyant and so brave, and so free from 
arrogance, that he won all the hearts. There was 

' Essays, Historical and Literary, Vol. I, by John Fiske. 

249 



tirti^ (Greatest American 

a mixture in him of Scottish shrewdness with 
French vivacity, that most people found irresist- 
ible. Knox and Laurens, Lafayette and Steuben, 
loved him with devoted affection." 

Then came 1781. On February 16, Hamilton 
resigned his staff-post tmder dramatic circum- 
stance. Washington had sent for his young Aide. 
Delayed two minutes by Lafayette, who stopped 
him on the stairs, Hamilton confronted his Com- 
mander in one of those towering rages which were 
as scathing as they were infrequent. "Colonel 
Hamilton," Washington exclaimed, "you have 
kept me waiting these ten minutes. I must tell 
you, sir, you treat me with disrespect." It was 
undue petulance, born of a day's hard irritations, 
which Washington regretted so keenly that he 
vainly endeavored to heal the breach ere morning 
came. Yet it was equally undue petulance, born 
of a great man's knowledge of his own tender fideli- 
ties, plus a subconscious longing for release from 
the thraldom of subordinating details, which flung 
back Hamilton's prompt and icily courteous reply: 
"I am not conscious of it, sir; but since you have 
thought it, we part." It was not a breach of 
friendship or of confidence or of mutual esteem. 
Each understood the other. It was but the inevi- 

250 



table incident that, sooner or later, was bound to 
interrupt a relationship which the talents and 
temper of Hamilton had out-grown. It was but 
the minor breach essential to a new and ultimate 
liaison which should bring both men to their 
maximum utility. 

The war now rapidly sped to triumphant climax. 
Hamilton obtained command of a light corps and 
at Yorktown, in October, obtained the final, peril- 
ous vantage of his career as a fightmg warrior. He 
led his men, with dashing impetuosity, against 
the first British redoubts and made the spectacular 
capture which set the pace for the surrender of 
Cornwallis and the accomplished independence of 
the confederated colonies. "Few men," wrote 
Washington of this final exploit, "have exhibited 
greater proofs of intrepidity, coolness and firmness 
than were shown on this occasion."' 

America's necessities now called Hamilton from 
military to civil responsibilities. But, as a matter 
of analysis, his whole career was a tremendous 
series of battle-episodes, each, no matter what its 
character, demanding that same soldierly intrepid- 
ity which sent him first across the Yorktown 
trenches. Whenever, in his civil life, occasion de- 

' The Life of Hamilton, by John C. Hamilton, his son. 

251 



tKfjc ^ttatt^t American 

manded army action, he was eager actually to get 
back into his uniform and lead a field command. 
His slight, frail body bore a warrior's heart. His 
love of strategy was a passion. His reverence for 
law and orderly society was so real that it involved 
an equal reverence for the soldierly forces that 
made law and order stable. His courage was so 
pure that he besought no risks from others which 
he was not eager to meet himself. Thus, when 
anarchy threatened in Western Pennsylvania and 
the "Whiskey Rebellion" had to be put down by 
force of arms, Hamilton petitioned Washington 
for the active command of these 1 5,000 troops. He 
did finally go to the rebellion front to take general 
control of the operations, which brought prompt 
and bloodless victory. 

But the crowning compliment to Hamilton's 
soldierly genius and dependability came in 1798 
when French aggressions upon American honor had 
driven the States to what seemed the inevitable 
recourses of war. With that confidence in Wash- 
ington which was a colonial tradition and a subse- 
quent habit to the hour of his death, the nation 
turned instinctively to its first magistrate, who 
was then in retirement at Mount Vernon, and, 
through President Adams, begged Washington 

252 



(E^fje <§reatesit iSmerican 

once more to take supreme command. He 
promptly consented upon two conditions; first, 
that no service should be required of him until the 
Army was actually in the field; second, that he 
should be permitted to ignore seniority grades, as 
established by Revolutionary service, and choose 
for himself the officers who were to be next to him 
in rank, and form his staff. Accordingly, he asked 
Adams to name three Major-Generals in the fol- 
lowing order: Hamilton, Charles Pinckney and 
Knox. General Pinckney magnanimously and 
patriotically recognized the propriety of Washing- 
ton's arrangement, though it spelled his own sub- 
ordination. "I declare," he wrote, "that it was 
with the greatest pleasure I saw Hamilton's name 
at the head of the list of Major-Generals, and I ap- 
plauded the discernment that had placed him 
there. I knew that his talents in war were great, 
that he had a genius capable of forming an exten- 
sive military plan, and a spirit, courageous and 
enterprising, equal to the execution of it."' 

Washington's obvious intent was to place upon 
Hamilton the burden of first responsibility in a war 
which promised to be as desperate as it was im- 
fortunate. How pertinent and essential he deemed 

' Life of Hamilton, Vol. II., by John T. Morse, Jr. 

253 



^fje (^ttSLttat American. 

this designation was soon demonstrated in no un- 
certain force. Adams was Hamilton's bitter, per- 
sonal enemy, for reasons that were factional and 
bigoted. When, as President, the hour arrived to 
issue the commissions, as asked by Washington 
and sanctioned by the Senate, Adams yielded to 
his pique and insisted upon naming Knox first, 
claiming that he was entitled to precedence on ac- 
count of his Revolutionary seniority. Furious 
controversy immediately broke about the White 
House and the Cabinet and surged about the stub- 
bom, but sturdy, old patriot in the executive chair. 
It was not until Washington notified Adams 
that he himself would resign if Hamilton was not 
given responsible priority, that Adams grudgingly 
yielded. 

No incident could be more important than this 
in estimating Hamilton's martial values — not ex- 
cepting even the eloquent fact that, back in active 
Revolutionary days, the great Lafayette had urged 
the designation of Hamilton as Adjutant-General. 
Washington was a statesman whose implacable 
integrity of purpose put his coimtry's welfare above 
all and every other consideration. He never was 
known to take counsel of personal or partisan preju- 
dice in any decision he was ever known to make. 

254 



^Ije ^ttattfit American 

Further, he, above all other men, was in position 
to know not only the true relative abilities of the 
leaders of his time, but also the seriousness of this 
critical war emergency which now called for the 
country's best, if the fruits of his own heroic service 
for the new Republic were to be saved from threat- 
ening disaster and preserved. That Washington, 
in all these conditions and circumstances, should 
have deemed Hamilton's elevation to supreme 
Army authority second only to himself, so vital 
that he threatened to sheathe his own sword if any- 
thing interfered with such a program, is the great- 
est compliment ever paid by one soldier to another. 
To have won such a confidence from Washington 
and to have deserved martial responsibilities which 
included even Washington's destiny in their pos- 
sible scope, marks Hamilton for all time as one of 
the greatest soldiers who ever followed the Ameri- 
can flag or stepped to the music of unconquered 
and imconquerable American Union. 

Hamilton flung himself with habitual energy 
into the task of preparing the new-fledged Republic 
for another war. Washington had stipulated that 
he be not called upon imtil the forward march was 
ready to proceed. This left the heavy responsibil- 
ity of all preliminaries upon Hamilton's shoulders. 

255 



tE^e (^reatesit J^merican 

But, as always, he was equal to the 'task and test. 
He first drafted and executed plans for the fortifica- 
tion of the harbor of New York. He made a com- 
plete program, which Washington approved, for 
recruiting men, for apportioning them and their 
officers to the various states, for supplies, arsenals, 
camp equipages and ordnance, for army organiza- 
tion, pay, uniforms, rations, rank, promotions, 
arms, fuel, and for the general regulation of bar- 
racks, garrisons and camps. With an avidity for 
detail equaled only by his mastery of the subjects 
attacked in swift and encyclopedic succession, he 
planned effective warfare for every arm of service, 
including medical, and secured all necessary sanc- 
tion from Congress and from the Department of 
War. Indeed, so completely did the Government 
look to him for constructive leadership, that his 
advice was sought and acted upon with no less 
enthusiasm in the Navy Department and in the 
Treastiry. Nothing escaped his capacious scrutiny. 
His plan of campaign was developed on a scale so 
extensive that it even comprehended the acquisi- 
tion of adjacent, continental areas, then imder 
foreign dominion, but destined ultmaately to be- 
come a part of the United States. Though a sol- 
dier, he was always the statesman. Though a 

256 



tKfie i^reatesft American 

statesman, he was always the soldier. He made 
every necessary arrangement for the invasion of 
Louisiana and the Floridas. Only a year before 
he had urged upon Secretary of State Pickering the 
importance of American expansion in these direc- 
tions. He had always been an ardent advocate 
of the natural growth of the States territorially. 
Indeed, the last resolution he had introduced in the 
old Confederation Congress had declared the 
"navigation of the Mississippi to be a clear and 
essential right" belonging to the new world gov- 
ernment. What he had failed to acquire by state- 
craft, he now proposed to get by war, not only by 
way of ultimate compensation for another martial 
investment on his country's part, not only because 
he realized that the surest, easiest way for America 
to battle France was through her subservient 
Spanish ally which was sovereign over these con- 
tiguous lands, but fundamentally because he saw, 
more clearly than any of his contemporaries, what 
destiny had in store in these respects for the Re- 
public. His vision was imperial in its aspirations 
for the widest possible expansion of the areas that 
should be the home and the citadel of the new de- 
mocracy. He even undertook discreet negotiations 
with the Spanish adventurer, Miranda, who sought 

257 



^'i)t ^xtattit American 

a coalition that should liberate Central and South 
America from Europe's sovereignty. No possible 
exigency escaped his restless imagination and tire- 
less zeal. No defensive war program — and it was 
all defensive — was more ambitiously complete. Up 
to the last possible moment of negotiations he had 
counseled peace with France, just as he had pre- 
viously done with England. He had a great 
warrior's abhorrence of war. He had left no effort 
unmade to compose amity. But when once breach 
came, like every great soldier, he proposed to take 
maximum advantage of whatever advantages war 
might afford; and in his prospective strategy was 
drawn the first map of an expanded, continental 
United States which grew in unfolding history as 
it had grown in his own luminous intellect. 

The sudden and unexpected composition of 
peace suspended the necessity for testing Hamil- 
ton's final abilities to execute the campaigns he had 
so brilliantly planned. But had a war with France 
actually occurred, no candid commentator can 
doubt that Hamilton would have distinguished 
himself as spectacularly in performance as he had 
in preparing his coimtry for the hour of judgment. 

The chief, immediate result of his work was 
the establishment of the United States Military 

258 



®f)^ (^rcatejst American 

Academy at West Point — a foundation stone in 
American military policy upon which the nation is 
still proud to lean. In The Conqueror, Gertrude 
Atherton quotes a letter from West Point's libra- 
rian as follows: "The best praise that can be given 
him is that he thoroughly understood the basic 
principles underlying military affairs, and that 
with superb genius he applied them to the exi- 
gencies of his time with that philosophical and at 
the same time practical talent which was his special 
endowment." 

Hamilton was appointed Major-General and 
Inspector-General of the United States Army, 
July 1 8, 1798, first ranking officer under Washing- 
ton as Lieutenant-General. He was honorably 
discharged as such on June 15, 1800. "It is a 
reasonable inference," said ex-Secretary of War 
Baker on December 7, 1920, "that he was the 
ranking officer in the Army from the death of 
General Washington, December 14, 1799, imtil his, 
Hamilton's, discharge; but he was not what is 
sometimes technically known as Commander-in- 
Chief." 



259 



^ropfjetic ^aragrapfisi 

In a dissective analysis such as this study of 
Hamilton's life has been, there are necessarily 
many biographical events that have failed to find 
a place under any of the various general subject- 
headings which mobilize the entries upon Hamil- 
ton's service record. To some extent the more 
intimate humanities, the more intimate disclosures 
of personality, have had to be subordinated to the 
broader sweeps of history. We have been contem- 
plating Hamilton and History in joint perspective. 
But to conclude the picture adequately, the kalei- 
doscope must fling a rushing series of progressive 
snap-shots upon the screen. These spot-glimpses 
reveal the man himself. They are specimens from 
the laboratory of his life. While in no sense do 
they pretend to complete a detailed biography, 
yet they do complete the exhibits necessary to a 
roimded vision of the man and his vast resource. 

Contemplate him, just turned a college sopho- 
more, attending the portentous "Meeting in The 

260 



Cfje ^veateat American 

Fields"' in July, 1774, to voice New York's de- 
mand for participation in the first Continental 
Congress. Great patriot orators were there, pre- 
pared for the momentous occasion. The best and 
most carefully selected talent colonial New York 
could boast was on the program. Every phase of 
outraged America's complaint and aspiration was 
poured out upon the restless, earnest throng. But 
none of the pleadings answered to young Hamil- 
ton's exalted measure of the sublimity of the occa- 
sion. None of the fervid exhortations answered 
the longings in his soul. With each succeeding 
interval he edged nearer to the stage. Destiny, 
working in his youthful blood, was pulling, pulling, 
pulling. Finally he sprang to the rude tribune, an 
imbidden advocate, a mere stripling of a boy, but, 
withal, a God-blessed apostle of liberty with a 
God-inspired message upon his unleashed tongue. 
It was his maiden speech, delivered imder auspices 
that might well have caused a veteran to halt. 
He faltered, trembled, like a ship bracing to 
the storm. The startled crowds stood silent in 
amazement. Quickly genius mastered fright. The 
lightning leaped from his lips. A great cause 
had found its oracle. He swayed the throng as had 
' The old name for City Hall Park. 

261. 



Cfje ^xtattsit American 

none of the high patriots who had preceded. He 
dominated the crowd and the occasion. One can 
imagine the tense, throbbing inspiration of the 
climax. "It is war ! " he cried. "It is war! It is 
the battlefield or slavery!" The first note of the 
American Revolution had been soxmded — by a boy 
of seventeen! First reveille had called America to 
arms! Where is there a parallel for this dramatic 
epic? Patrick Henry, with his immortal "Give 
me liberty or give me death ! " had yet to paraphrase 
Hamilton's startling and courageous challenge. 
Benjamin Franklin, persuasive representative of 
the Colonies in England, was saying to Pitt: "I 
never heard from any person the least expression 
of a wish for separation." Washington was writ- 
ing to a friend: "No such thing as independence is 
desired by any thinking man in America." ' Lex- 
ington and Concord and Bimker Hill still had 
nearly a year to wait. It remained for Hamilton 
to sotind the tocsin. He was first torch-bearer to 
the new crusades. A boy of seventeen! Two 
years before, an immigrant ! 

Contemplate him, one year later, wearing his 
country's uniform, burning with passions that 

' Beard and Bagley's History of the American People. 

262 



Wf^t <^reates;t J^merican 

are born only in the tropics' blood, committed to 
the Revolution with an abandon that brooked no 
compromise, yet daring to stand upon the steps of 
Dr. Cooper's house and arguing back an angry mob 
of maddened patriots intent upon wreaking venge- 
ance on a suspected Tory scholar! Similarly he 
saved one Thurman's, life when "Travis' Mob" 
was bent on summary discipline. Similarly he 
sought to capture vigilantes who carried off the 
types of Rivington, the Tory printer. In all these 
tinder-instances, he risked his popularity, his influ- 
ence, his life, for his sense of fair-play, his love of 
order, and his keen and constant perceptions that 
always distinguished between liberty and license. 
Such was the youth. Where is his parallel? Small 
wonder that maturing years made him his country's 
master man ! 



Contemplate him at twenty-three, face to face 
with the wicked treachery of Benedict Arnold. 
Toward the traitor to his country, Hamilton was 
black with bitterness. But for young Andre, Brit- 
ish spy, who was serving another cause with the 
same blind fidelity with which Hamilton under 
similar circumstances would have cheerfully served 

263 



Wt)t <^reates;t American 

his own, he conceived a poignant fancy. His 
heart and sympathies were touched — as in not un- 
similar occasions, Lincoln's were in later years. 
An exchange of Arnold for Andre would have 
served alike his loves and hates, and to this end he 
dedicated his solicitude. But the rigid mandates 
of military policy were impervious. At last, in 
final desperation, he asked that Andre be shot 
instead of hanged — the death of a soldier, not a 
criminal. But Washington could not relent. In 
some exigencies, mercy turns to flint. In letters 
to Miss Betsy Schuyler, his future wife, Hamilton 
described all these unhappy scenes with a pathos 
and a grief that hold a mirror to his soul and show 
him as chivalrous as he was brave, as human as he 
was sublime. 



Contemplate him at twenty-five, a pivotal mem- 
ber of the Continental Congress at the minimum 
age for congressional service permitted under the 
Constitution as it stands to-day, hot with indigna- 
tion that the shoddy government, punctilious in 
drawing its own pay, should propose to dismiss the 
Continental Army without a pretense of settling 
its long arrears. He lashed this ingratitude with 

264 



all the vehemence of which his facile tongue and 
pen were capable. He made the cause of the 
humblest soldier in the ranks his personal con- 
cern. He had fought with them. He knew 
their sufferings and their griefs and woes. He 
acknowledged them to be the saviours of their 
land. He burned with anger at the suggestion of 
the government's tacit repudiation of such a 
solemn debt. In committee and on the floor of 
Congress he fought for these heroes of 66 battles 
for the nation's independence. He was Chairman 
of the Committee on Military Affairs. He re- 
ported a measure providing full payment for life 
to all seriously disabled officers, and for the es- 
tablishment of a hospital and home for all the 
non-commissioned officers and private soldiers, 
who were proper inmates for it, there to be sup- 
ported for life, and providing them also with cloth- 
ing. To achieve these ends, he introduced a reso- 
lution proposing an additional loan of three mil- 
lion livres from France, pending reimbursement 
of the national Treasury by the States. This reso- 
lution asserted that Congress "confidently relies, 
for an immediate and efficacious attention to the 
present requisition, upon the disposition of their 
constituents, not only to do justice to those brave 

265 



Wf)t (^reatefiit American 

men who have suffered and sacrificed so much for 
their country and whose distress must be extreme, 
should they be sent from the field without the pay- 
ment of a part of their well-earned dues, but also 
to enable Congress to maintain the faith and repu- 
tation of the United States, both of which are 
seriously concerned in relieving the necessities of a 
meritorious army and fulfilling the public stipula- 
tions." He proposed and secured legislation pro- 
viding land grants to these veterans. He left no 
stone unturned to defend the rights of his former 
compatriots in arms. Never was the doctrine of 
"a compelling moral obligation," as preached so 
earnestly in another connection by President 
Wilson twelve decades later, more strenuously 
advanced. Indeed, so pointed was Hamilton's 
uncomprising leadership in these respects that he 
was wrongly suspected of writing the ' ' Newburgh 
Address," proposing that the Army enforce its own 
claims with its bayonets. He was the original 
prophet of that "square deal" which another fear- 
less friend of justice immortalized in a later cen- 
tury. He was the first and main reliance of every 
Revolutionary soldier with an unfulfilled debt 
against the government which Revolutionary sacri- 
fice and service had brought through the martial 

266 



^fje (^reatesit iSmerican 

storms. Such were the human and humane in- 
stincts that paralleled abstract constructive 
statesmanship and genius in this rare man. 



•Contemplate him at thirty, the minimum age 
at which our present Constitution consents that 
youth acquires matured law-making eligibility for 
higher legislative service in the higher congressional 
branch. Contemplate him, proceeding to the New 
York Assembly where he not only took upon him- 
self the leadership against Governor Clinton's 
opposition to national revenues contributed by the 
States, but where also he displayed such a versatil- 
ity of constructive genius in such an infinity of 
pertinent directions, that his youth, in years, seems 
swallowed up in the character of patriarch. Says 
Morse : ' 

"He labored hard to prevent legislation in con- 
travention of the Treaty of Peace; he corrected 
gross theoretical blunders in a proposed system of 
regulating elections, and strove hard, though not 
altogether successfully, to eliminate religious re- 
strictions; he succeeded in preventing the dis- 
franchisement of a great number of persons for 

^ Life of Hamilton, by John T. Morse, Jr. 

267 



Stic (^reatesft American 

having been interested, often unwillingly, in priva- 
teering ventures; he stayed some absurd laws 
proposed concerning the proposed qualifications of 
candidates for office; in the matter of taxation, he 
substituted for the old method of an arbitrary, 
official assessment, with all its gross risks of error 
and partiality, the principle of allowing the in- 
dividual to return imder oath his taxable property; 
he labored to promote public education by statu- 
tory regulation; his 'first great object was to place 
a book in the hand of every American child,' and 
he evolved a system which served as the model of 
that promulgated in France by the imperial decree 
of 1808; he had much to do with the legislation 
concerning the relations of debtor and creditor, 
then threatening to dissever the whole frame of 
society; he was obliged to give no little attention 
to the department of criminal law; finally, he had 
to play a chief part in settling the long and perilous 
struggle concerning the 'New Hampshire Grants,' 
the region now constituting the State of Vermont ; 
his efforts in this matter chiefly averted war and 
brought the first new State into the Union." In- 
cidentally, he proposed an institution for public 
instruction under the form and title of a University, 
tp be known as the " University of the State New 

268 



®I)C i^reategt J^mcrican 

York" ; and, to his energy and enlightened patriot- 
ism New York City is indebted for the stately 
presence and benignant influence of her noble 
University and for the establishment of several of 
the most useful Academies which now exist 
throughout the State. ' 

With all the respect due to modem State legisla- 
tures and the faithful citizens who sit in them, it 
is little short of impossible for us, of modem days, 
to imagine such a scintillating, encyclopedic genius 
in these fields of responsibility, as this trite para- 
graph describes. It is a picture of his versatility 
and power. It is a typical chapter in his roll of 
achievement. Whether functioning in big or little 
responsibilities, whether in State or Nation, 
whether in Capitol or Cabinet, he was always so 
astoundingly superior to his contemporaries or suc- 
cessors, down to the present hour, that the record, 
upon occasion, sounds more like legend than like 
fact. This paragraph describing him at thirty, an 
apostrophe to the greatest State legislator, is but 
an average cross-section of his whole public life. 
There was apparently nothing which he could not 
and did not do superlatively well. We think we 

' Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Samuel M. 
Schmucker, 1856. 

269 



^tt i^reatesit American 

have modern legislative problems of terrific, driv- 
ing pressure and baffling complexity — and, of 
course, we have. Yet they are transparent sim- 
plicity compared with the uncharted enigma which 
the Republic's founders had to confront. But 
suppose some modern statesman should arise, in 
State or National forum, and effectively demon- 
strate to us that he has a ready, perfected, practical 
plan for each of our modern emergencies ; and sup- 
pose we learned to lean upon his wisdom, subcon- 
sciously expecting it to function always to our 
salvation and advantage, as was the case with 
Hamilton in these early days. If you can imagine 
such a Titan in this modern time, do you doubt 
what would be his destiny? Why did so many 
Americans turn to Herbert Hoover with an elo- 
quent demonstration of modern trust and confi- 
dence? Was it — is it — not because he proved his 
capacity in crisis? Suppose some statesman stood 
in relation to all our problems as Hoover did in 
relation to one or two. Would there be much 
doubt as to his rating or his ultimate goal? Yet 
all this describes, without exaggeration, what 
Hamilton meant to his incubative age. The vast 
gamut of subjects which found him their master in 
this State legislative career to which this paragraph 

270 



^^e (Greatest American 

particularly refers, later became widely expanded 
and enlarged as his field of responsibility broadened. 
But even with the spotlight concentrated upon 
this single contemplation, when Hamilton was only 
thirty years of age, can our history provide a 
parallel for breadth of vision, wealth of mentality, 
and depth of human understanding in such a 
variety of ways? 

An interesting personal picture of Hamilton, at 
about this time, is afforded in an old book by 
Rufus Wilmot Griswold' (the author claims, in a 
pre-word, to have lived close to his subject and to 
have presented "a most exact adherence to truth" 
in "even the most trivial details of narrative, de- 
lineation and suggestion, ' ' all of which are ' 'warrant- 
ed by unquestionable authorities"). The picture 
is of Hamilton among his confreres. 

"That is he, with such a remarkably expressive 
face. His age is about 30. You observe that he 
is one of the smallest men here: indeed, under the 
middle size, and thin in person, but remarkably 
erect and dignified. His hair is turned back from 
his forehead, powdered, and collected in a club 
behind. Mark the fairness of his complexion and 

' American Society in the Days of Washington, by 
Griswold. 

271 



tE^ije ^vtattui American 

his rosy cheeks. Watch the play of his singularly 
expressive countenance: in repose, it seems grave 
and thoughtful; but see him when spoken to, and 
instantly all is lighted up with intelligent vivacity, 
and around his lips plays a smile of extraordinary 
sweetness. It is impossible to look at his features 
and not see that they are ineffaceably stamped by 
the divine hand with the impress of genius. His is 
indeed a mind of immense grasp, and unlimited 
original resources. Whether he speaks or writes, 
he is equally great. He can probably endure more 
unremitted and intense mental labor than any man 
in this body. So rapid are his perceptions, and at the 
time so clear, that he seems sometimes to reach his 
conclusions by a species of intuition. He possesses 
in a wonderful degree that most unfailing mark of 
the highest order of intellect, the comprehensive- 
ness of view which leads to accurate generalization. 
He catches the principle involved in a discussion, 
as if by instinct, and adheres rigidly to that, quite 
sure that thereby the details are certain to be 
right. Another mark of eminent genius is continu- 
ally exhibiting itself in the striking originality of 
his views. There is nothing commonplace about 
his mind. Among great men anywhere, Alexander 
Hamilton would be felt to be great. As an in- 

272 



dividual, he is a frank, amiable and high-minded 
gentleman." 



Contemplate him at thirty-one, leading a for- 
lorn hope in the New York Constitutional Con- 
vention at Poughkeepsie, the indomitable cham- 
pion of Union and federalization, never acknowl- 
edging defeat, facing a hostile majority through 
six guerilla weeks which would have broken down 
a genius less sturdily endowed with the power of 
personality and the authority of right! On that 
final day of the supreme test, he spoke through 
many solemn hours with such a challenge to his 
adversaries and his time as could have been sus- 
tained by few advocates in the story of the world. 
An orator must have within his own breast all the 
bottomless well-springs of human sympathy in 
order to touch others with miracle-words as did 
young Hamilton that fateful July day. He must 
know the himian emotions, with confident mastery, 
to play the scale as did Hamilton in that last ap- 
peal. To few men is it given to face such a situa- 
tion; and to few men is it permitted thus to rend 
the rocks of opposition by the silver and the steel of 
human words. To read the story is to read a 

i8 273 



^\)t i^reatesit American 

legend. To sense the hazardous situation which 
he faced and overcame, to guage the odds, try to 
imagine some modern Senator, in the Upper House 
of Congress in the long sessions of 1920 during 
which the Treaty of Versailles was submitted to 
debate; try to imagine a Senator with the power, 
by sheer weight of oratorical appeal, who could 
have won President Wilson's "last guard" away 
from its "League of Nations" fealties, or, on the 
other hand, who could have compelled the "irre- 
concilables" to yield to the Wilsonian program! 
Where in the whole story of America is there proof 
that any citizen, save Hamilton, was or is an 
orator of such resultful power? 

Chancellor Kent, then a young lawyer, was a spec- 
tator in this convention. Of Hamilton's miracu- 
lous achievement in turning a close-knit majority 
opposition, foresworn to everlasting Constitu- 
tional hostility, into a majority favorable to the 
new adventure, Kent has said: 

"The over-powering eloquence of Colonel Hamil- 
ton was exerted to its utmost pitch, and shook the 
most resolved of the majority. He maintained 
the ascendancy on every question. He was in- 
disputably pre-eminent. He spoke with great 
earnestness and energy, and with considerable and 

274 



^t)t (^reatesit American 

sometimes vehement gesture. His language was 
clear, nervous and classical, his investigations 
penetrated to the foundation and reason of every 
doctrine and principle which he examined ; and he 
brought to the debate a mind richly adorned with 
all the learning and precedents requisite for the 
occasion. He never omitted to meet, examine 
and discover the strength or weakness, the truth 
or falsehood, of every proposition which he had to 
contend with. His candor was magnanimous, and 
rose to a level with his abilities. His temper was 
spirited, but courteous, amiable and generous ; and 
he frequently made powerful and pathetic appeals 
to the moral sense and patriotism, to the fears and 
hopes of the assembly; and painted vividly the 
difficulties and dangers of the crisis. His . . . 
speeches . . . were regarded at the time, by the 
best judges, as the noblest specimens which the 
debates in that, or any other, assembly ever 
afforded of the talents and wisdom of the states- 
man." 

Discussing oratory in one of his ancient letters, 
Pliny has said: "He who is possessed of the true 
spirit of oratory, should be bold and elevated, and 
sometime even flame out, be hurried away, and 
frequently tread upon the brink of a precipice ; for 

275 



tIDtje (Greatest i^merican 

danger is generally near whatever is towering and 
exalted. The plain, it is true, affords a safer, but 
for that reason a more humble and inglorious, 
path; they who run are more likely to stumble than 
they who creep; but the latter gain no honor by 
not slipping, while the former even fall with glory. 
It is with eloquence as with some other arts; she 
is never more pleasing than when she risks most." 
If any orator ever dared the precipical brinks, rim- 
ning fearlessly while others crept, and risking 
victory against any odds, no matter what the 
menace in disparity, Hamilton matched the maxi- 
mum of Pliny's measure, and neither slipped nor 
fell. 



Contemplate him, again, at thirty-two, called to 
the key-position in the first Cabinet of Washington, 
and welcomed by the first Congress imder the 
Constitution as the trusted counselor to whom any 
branch of Government could turn, as to an oracle, 
for the correct answer to any problem among a 
multitude diversified. The mere chronology is 
startling. A Minister of Government at thirty- 
two! Our modem standards would be shocked at 
the mere suggestion of the induction of such youth 

276 



into high Cabinet responsibility. We would shake 
our heads and doubt. For purposes of this com- 
parison, consider the last Cabinet of President 
Wilson in these respects — and his Cabinet was but 
typical of practically all official families since the 
memory of man runneth not to the contrary: 
Secretary of State Colby, 51 when he entered his 
portfolio; Secretary of the Treasury Houston, 55, 
as this data is compiled; Secretary of War Baker, 
at the half century mark; Secretary of the Navy 
Daniels, 59; Secretary of Labor Wilson, also 59; 
Attorney-General Palmer, 49; Secretary of Com- 
merce Alexander, 69; Postmaster- General Burle- 
son, 58 ; Secretary of Agriculture Meredith, 45. As 
a matter of fact, these exhibits are imdoubtedly 
below the average, very considerably, of the past 
fifty years. In the light of this modem habit and 
experience, though making all allowances for the 
fact that a young Government naturally leaned on 
younger men than would be the case when ma- 
turer years have permitted greater seasoning of 
wisdom, is it not astoimding that the most impor- 
tant member of Washington's first Cabinet should 
have been a man of but 32 ; and, more astounding 
still, that he should have been the dominating 
influence of the entire Administration? 

277 



Ci)e (^reatesit American 

Not only did he chart the basis for restored 
federal credit in all its ramifications, but also, in 
quick, flashing succession, he planned the revenue 
cutter service, recommended navigation laws, 
drafted the first bill for a postal system, laid the 
foundations for the purchase and establishment of 
West Point, proposed the means for handling 
public lands, established the mint, advised the 
decimal system for our money, with the dollar 
as the unit, recommended the structure of success- 
fully encouraged commerce, proposed the patent 
system, and, generally, served the role of mentor 
to every branch and every phase of the new Gov- 
ernment. Other splendid statesmen played their 
important part in these concerns. Always, the 
influence of Washington, to whom Hamilton was 
like a brother, was tremendous in the equation. 
But when all is said and done, it was the varie- 
gated genius of the "Little Lion" — "Alexander, 
the Great," he was called by his jealous enemies — 
equal always to any emergency, which made the 
primal contribution to the pilotry which swept the 
Ship of State beyond the threatening shoals. A 
more cosmopolitan achievement would be difficult 
for the imagination to conjure. 



278 



tlTfie #reates!t American 

While serving his country and his President as 
Master Minister in the Cabinets of State, Hamilton 
found time to demonstrate, once more, his profound 
fidelity to the cause of popular education. On No- 
vember 12, 1792, petitioners headed by Samuel Kirk- 
land signed a memorial praying that Hamilton and 
fifteen other persons ' ' be incorporated by the name 
and style of the Trustees of Hamilton Oneida 
Academy at Whitestown in the County of Herki- 
mer" in the State of New York. (Journal of the 
meeting of the Regents of the University of New- 
York State, January 29, 1793.) The prayer was 
granted and the charter issued, with Hamilton's 
name at the head of the sponsor-lists. Kirkland, 
who had been Washington's agent during the 
Revolutionary War for the management of the 
Iroquois, was the foimder of this school ; but Ham- 
ilton was its inspiration and to it, as was his habit, 
he gave the best within him. The original plan 
contemplated an ambitious project to meet the 
Indian menace, which constantly threatened from 
the west, by processes of education through which 
Red Men and Whites should be taught together 
in one, common institution. Washington's entire 
Cabinet approved the adventure, depending, as 
usual, upon Hamilton to function for the govern- 

279 



Wi)t dlreatesft American 

mental group. Baron Steuben laid the corner- 
stone. But the Indians in general proved in- 
capable of receiving education and the Whites alone 
have been the beneficiaries. These beneficiaries, 
however, down through twelve decades, link the 
name of Hamilton with one of the greatest among 
America's great schools. Twenty years after its 
original incorporation, the Hamilton Oneida 
Academy was invested with the collegiate powers 
and privileges which it has since broadly and use- 
fully exercised across the span of a century of edu- 
cation. Hamilton College at Clinton, New York, 
stands today as perhaps the greatest, tangible 
memorial to America's "Alexander, The Great" 
in the whole land; and in its fine traditions, its 
brilliant record and its superb ideals it is worthy 
the historic name it bears. 

In connection with the exercises of its one hun- 
dred and sixth commencement week, Jtine, 191 8, 
the College accepted and imveiled a statue of 
Hamilton, the gift of Thomas Redfield Proctor 
of Utica, New York, and the work of George T. 
Brewster. The formal address of acceptance was 
delivered by Elihu Root, Chairman of the Board of 
Trustees of Hamilton College and one of its most 
distingtdshed alumni. For the purposes of this 

280 




The Hamilton Statue on Hamilton College Campus at Clinton, New York 



tE^fjr ^ttnttit l^merican 

volume, it is prophetically interesting to quote 
briefly from Mr. Root's eloquent address upon that 
memorable occasion. 

"We raise statues to Alexander Hamilton," 
said he, "because the lessons of a century and a 
quarter have shown that the people of the United 
States owe to him a greater debt for the creation of 
the American Republic than to any other man 
save Washington. He was not greater than Wash- 
ington, but the high quality and power and intense 
devotion and splendid achievement of his service 
for the cause of ordered liberty through self-gov- 
ernment, set him next to Washington. The two 
supplemented each other and worked together in 
perfect confidence and affection with a single pur- 
pose and the same just conception of the essence of 
a Government that should reconcile liberty and 
obedience to law, independence and peace, sov- 
ereignty and honor. Together they endured de- 
traction and public abuse, and strove against 
ignorance and folly, and selfishness and prejudice 
and malice, against intriguers and demagogues 
and traitors, through the critical period which 
followed the recognition of independence, when 
the principles of the new Nation had to be deter- 
mined, and the institutions to give them effect had 

281 



^fje ^ttattit American 

to be established. At the end of that first forma- 
tive period the great-hearted character of Wash- 
ington and the marvelous insight of Hamilton's 
genius into the principles that control human con- 
duct, had given to the future of mankind the in- 
stitutions of government, which after a century's 
test of human weakness, of domestic and foreign 
war, of vast growth and prosperity, now bind to- 
gether one hundred million people in the effective 
exercise of power to preserve Christian civiliza- 
tion, and to defend their liberty and the world's 
liberty. Hamilton was not greater than Lincoln, 
but if there had been no Hamilton, probably 
there would have been no Lincoln, because there 
would have been no Union for Lincoln to save. 
. . . Alexander Hamilton was the greatest 
teacher of the art of self-government in the history 
of the world. . . . It is due to Hamilton more 
than to any other save Washington that this 
people have a conception, a tradition, an ideal, of 
a Nation whose power is a bulwark of liberty, so 
that they are willing to make sacrifice for it, feel- 
ing that when they give up for it their means and 
their peaceful careers, and their lives, and the 
lives of those dear to them, they are laying their 
offerings on the altar of liberty, enlarging power 

282 



TOc i^reatesit American 

for the moment that Hberty may live. This granite 
may crumble, this bronze may corrode, this College 
may be dissolved; but the monument of his work 
will remain." 



Contemplate him, at thirty-six, stepping be- 
yond the functions of his Treasury post, to domi- 
nate America's decisions in the first great crisis in 
foreign policy which faced the new United States. 
Four days after the news had arrived that revo- 
lutionary France and England had clashed in war, 
Hamilton wrote Jay, urging the need of a declara- 
tion of American neutrality. He sent post-haste 
to Mt. Vernon urging Washington's immediate 
presence in Philadelphia to order a decisive course. 
With characteristic prospicience, he saw the neces- 
sity — and, at the same time, the opportimity — for 
separating American destiny from European fates, 
perhaps once and for all. Jefferson was Secretary 
of State and nominally responsible for the han- 
dling of foreign relations. But he was opposed to 
affirmative action. He favored "watchful wait- 
ing," to borrow a term of modern implication. He 
loved France and the basic ideas of her revolution. 
He had behind him all that popular gratitude that 

283 



Wi)t <!^reateBt American 

France had won, in America, through Lafayette, 
and all that popular prejudice that England had 
inspired through George. For him, American 
neutrality was probably not sufficiently pro- 
French. He sought to identify both Washington 
and Hamilton with a "British party." For one of 
his professional subtlety, this was a simple matter. 
But the truth was that Hamilton cared nought for 
either France or England. He had an eye single 
to the welfare of his own country, and he was de- 
termined that the new world's order should stand 
apart from old world dominion or sinister influence. 
He was the original exponent of "America First 
and Last," to borrow and amplify another 
expressive, modem idiom. 

Washington gathered his Cabinet together. 
Jefferson and Hamilton presented their ideas. 
Jefferson was over-ruled. The Cabinet was firm 
in its allegiance to Hamilton's vigorous views. 
Neutrality was ordained — the only concession to 
Jefferson's feelings being that the word itself was 
omitted. The first, great principle in America's 
traditional foreign policy thus was established ; and 
though it was greeted with violent execrations by 
the radicals, and temporarily abandoned during 
ten years of subsequent, bitter, poHtical conflict, 

284 



V^f)t (Greatest Jllmerican 

including three years of foreign war, it remains 
to this day a cardinal philosophy in the American 
heart — as most recently demonstrated by the 
electoral results of President Wilson's "solemn 
referendum" -in which his "League of Nations," 
with its interwoven internationalism and inter- 
continentalism, failed, by wide margin, of American 
popular approval. 

Tin the light of this episode, it is easy to trace 
the source of those incandescent sentences in 
Washington's Farewell Address which implore 
American posterity to abjure "permanent, in- 
veterate antipathies against particular nations and 
passionate attachments for others" lest it become 
a "slave to its animosity or its affections." It is 
easy to locate inspiration for those historic warn- 
ings against foreign entanglements. "In no one 
respect did the individuality of Hamilton impress 
itself more directly on the future of the United 
States." ' As a matter of fact, here was the cradle 
of that other great American policy which ulti- 
mately was to be adorned with the name of one of 
Hamilton's most unscrupulous traducers. The Pro- 
clamation of Neutrality was the original promulga- 
tion of the "Monroe Doctrine." Its first inkling 
' Life of Hamilton, by Senator Lodge. 

285 



tBf^t (Greatest American 

had appeared twelve years before in "The Con- 
tinentalist" when Hamilton urged that, after the 
final triumph of the American colonies, it should 
be the unfailing purpose of our public policy to 
prevent for all time any further European inter- 
ference with the affairs of the whole known North 
American continent. Even then, before Corn- 
wallis had yielded up his sword at Yorktown, this 
youthful patriot-seer leaped decades with his 
vision. "The spectacle of Monroe, the defeated 
but undiscouraged assailant of Hamilton's private 
honor and public policy, roaring most nobly to all 
the ages out of the stolen skin of the ' Little Lion,' 
is possibly the crowning triumph of a great idea." ' 



Contemplate him, at forty, heroically choosing 
to strip the veils from every last detail of the only 
incidental scandal that ever blemished his private 
life, rather than expediently to leave a shred of sus- 
picion against the impeccable integrity of his pub- 
lic works. It is probably a paradox to say that an 
immoral episode can exhibit a moral tritimph ; and 
yet it is the truth that Hamilton's conduct in the 
notorious "Reynolds case" testifies to a grandeur 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 

286 



^fje (^teatesit American 

of character rarely found in the chronicles of hu- 
man passion. "It is to be lamented," Washing- 
ton once said, "that great characters are seldom 
without blot." It would be pleasant to think that 
a great hero is devoid of delinquency — though few 
are ; but it is the human fact that in the simimer of 
1 79 1, Hamilton drifted into an intrigue with a 
worthless woman by the name of Reynolds, who 
first imposed upon his notorious willingness to help 
the troubled, then commercialized her advantage 
for the benefit of a renegade husband, and finally 
submitted herself to be the agent of the vilest con- 
spiracy in the history of American politics. The 
story is not a pleasant contemplation from the 
view-point of a friendly, Hamiltonian biographer. 
But candor compels that it be set down in its true 
light; and a fair estimate of the whole miserable 
episode must concede that it proves Hamilton the 
possessor of a moral courage of exemplary degree, 
even as it casts a dark stain upon the honor of 
James Monroe. Indeed, it provided the occasion 
for such a display of uncompromising moral steel, 
that Hamilton comes from the incident unique 
among all those of our great men whose failings 
have been known but charitably screened. 

The husband of this Reynolds woman appeared 

287 



conveniently upon the scene, according to time- 
honored formula, and was paid a thousand dollars 
to console his pretended griefs. This was fol- 
lowed by subsequent payments in small amounts 
as Reynolds' misfortunes seemed to justify assist- 
ance. Fifteen months later Reynolds ran foul of 
the Treasury Department which, in the routine of 
duty and without the knowledge of its chief, prose- 
cuted him for subornation of perjury in a case of 
fraud. Hamilton high-mindedly refused to inter- 
fere, and vengeful spite sent Reynolds to Hamil- 
ton's political enemies as soon as the prison term 
was done. Speaker Muhlenberg, Venables and 
James Monroe became the confidants of Reynolds 
and his wife. The story told them was that Ham- 
ilton had frequently supplied Reynolds with money 
with which to speculate for their joint account in 
old Confederation securities which Hamilton's 
assimiption policies heavily multiplied in market 
values. The resultant charge was infidelity to 
public trust so gross that Reynolds declared his 
documents would suffice to "hang the Secretary 
of the Treasury." 

This gleeful trio of hostile politicians, long denied 
the slightest opportunity to force their Nemesis to 
fight defensively, waited upon Hamilton and told 

288 



Clje ^reatesit American 

him what they had found. Hamilton never hesi- 
tated for a moment. His rectitude was so in- 
grained that there was not the flicker of a doubt in 
his acceptance of the hard, pitiless alternative he 
would pursue. Promptly he disclosed the whole 
truth in its utmost detail and candor. Nothing 
was held back. His three visitors were chagrined 
to find they had been duped. In Hamilton's own 
words,' "the result was a full and unequivocal 
acknowledgment on the part of the three gentle- 
men, of perfect satisfaction with the explanation, 
and expressions of regret at the trouble and em- 
barrassment which had been occasioned to me. 
Mr. Muhlenberg and Mr. Venables, in particular, 
manifested a degree of sensibility on the occasion. 
Mr. Monroe was more cold, but entirely explicit." 

With typical precision, Hamilton promptly and 
voluntarily put complete memoranda in the hands 
of all three men to clinch the proofs of his public 
probity, and all agreed that the situation merited 
complete, confidential secrecy. It remained for 
James Monroe to break this faith. Five years 
later, stimg by recall from Paris which he blamed 
to Hamilton's influence with Washington, he, 
according to circumstantial evidence convincing 

' Vol. VII., Works of Alexander Hamilton. 
19 289 



tK^fje (^reatesit American 

beyond a reasonable doubt, saw to it that these 
complete memoranda reached a disreputable pub- 
lisher, Callender by name, whose moral status is 
amply fixed by his prosecution for sedition in 1800, 
and whose fidelities are amply pictured by his sub- 
sequent alleged revelations regarding the private 
life of Jefferson, his erstwhile patron. 

Callender revived the charge of official corrup- 
tion against Hamilton, based on the Reynolds' 
exhibit, though at the time he knew the black 
falsity of his criminal libel. Politics was no parlor 
pastime in that day of passions as primitive as the 
methods of their cruel expression. Callender and 
his sponsors put futile confidence in a belief that 
Hamilton would not dare brave a disclosure of the 
true facts. They felt that, since his public work 
was largely a closed book, he would choose the 
alternative of sitting silent or, at most, entering but 
feeble and vague protest against these post-mortem 
aspersions upon his public honor. They well knew 
his pride and his abhorrence of paraded personali- 
ties. But they did not understand that he put 
his integrity and his pure coimtry-love above all 
else in all the world. 

After a brief correspondence, in which Venables 
and Muhlenberg repudiated the disclosures as a 

290 



tlTfjc (^reatesft American 

breach of honor as well as a base libel, while Monroe 
whined a lame and halting alibi, Hamilton elected 
to go to the people with the whole sordid tale; and, 
as usual with him, once committed to the task, he 
did it with a thoroughness that left nothing to be 
said when he was done. At bitter cost in griefs 
that smote his heart and bowed down those who 
were near and dear to him, he published all the facts 
in as courageous a pamphlet as ever came from 
human pen. He spared nothing and pleaded no 
palliation. His sole aim was to put his public 
honesty beyond attack. Says one commentator: 
"No one has yet been foimd bold enough to chal- 
lenge the completeness of his vindication." ' Says 
another: "The manliness of the act, the self-in- 
flicted punishment, and the high sense of public 
honor thus exhibited, silenced even his opponents; 
but the confession was one which must have wrung 
Hamilton to the quick, and it shows an amount of 
nerve and determination for which our history can 
furnish no parallel."^ 

Hamilton had his human faults. "There are 
spots even on the disc of the sim."^ The infallible 

' Oliver's Alexander Hamilton. 
^ Life of Hamilton, by Senator Lodge. 
3 Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Schmucker. 

291 



^fje (^reateit iamerican 

mortal has not yet graced the earth. The wonder 
is that the pitiless scrutiny under which Hamilton 
had to live every hour of his career should have 
found so little to capitalize against his name and 
fame. Posterity knows his whole story. There 
are no inherited whisperings that attribute weak- 
nesses at which we are supposed to wink indul- 
gently, as in the case of many another leader. 
His rectitude of general conduct is but emphasized 
by the single exception which assiduous character- 
assassins finally disclosed. 

It would be multiplied injustice to assume, from 
the Reynolds incident, that Hamilton was an un- 
faithful husband. On the contrary, he loved his 
wife and his family with intense affections down to 
the hour of his death. He was always happiest 
when in the bosom of his family. When Mrs. 
Hamilton, his widow, died at the ripe old age of 
ninety-seven, a verse of love devotion written when 
Hamilton was a youth attached to Washington's 
headquarters, was foimd in a little bag about her 
neck — the talisman of a reciprocated life's affec- 
tions. The perfect generosity of his rare nature 
was never more clearly shown than in his relations 
with those near and dear. The Reynolds incident 
demonstrated nothing of a fundamental character, 

292 




Mrs. Alexander Hamilton 

From the painting by Inman 



^!)f (Creates;! !^merican 

except as it demonstrated a purity of public pur- 
pose so lofty that it conquers every other senti- 
ment which contemplation of this unhappy episode 
might otherwise arouse. 



Contemplate Hamilton at forty-seven, struck 
down by an assassin's bullet and moiu'ned by an 
entire nation with a fervid grief which could not 
have pronounced a greater tribute to the people's 
love for any man. The news that the superb 
Washington had passed to the eternities did not 
occasion more profotind and universal sorrow. 
Probably the nearest historical parallel came in 
later years when the noble Lincoln was swept to 
his martyrdom. Modern generations, familiar 
with the country's reflex when Garfield and 
McKinley were shot, can probably but illy judge 
the state of public mind when hastening couriers 
spread the crushing bulletins to the young Repub- 
lic that the man who was its greatest reliance had 
been done to his death. A pall fell upon the na- 
tion. Beneath it, white anger against the wanton 
murderer vied with sorrow for his victim for pos- 
session of the nation's soul. "He had been the 
brain of the American Army in his boyhood; he 

293 



^\)t (Greatest American 

had conceived an empire in his yoimg twenties; 
he had poured his genius into a sickly infant, and 
set it, a young giant, on its legs, when he was under 
two score. Almost all things had come to him by 
intuition, for he had lived in advance of much 
knowledge." ' Likewise, his country, by intuition, 
had come to expect that his genius and his courage 
would be equal to any emergency demanding su- 
perior leadership which might arise. Partisan 
though he came to be in the necessary execution 
of his far-flung undertakings for his country, all 
honorable men acknowledged his granite integrity, 
his steel-true heart, the unselfishness of his ideals, 
his devotion to the common weal, and his miracu- 
lous ability to meet exigency with dominating re- 
source. His death, then, came to all as a national 
calamity. To the gripping, inconsolable sorrow 
of his friends and the imfeigned respect of his 
political enemies, was added a well-nigh universal 
wrath, nursed in every patriotic breast, that 
America should have been robbed of such a colossal 
friend in the very prime of his middle years and at 
the apex of his potential utility to a coimtry that 
could illy spare the greatest of her constructive 
patrons. 

' The Conqueror, by Gertrude Atherton. 

294 



^f}e (^reatesJt American 

The nation stood in blackest mourning and 
watched the solemn cortege that reverently bore 
Hamilton to his long, last home. Soldiers, Judges, 
Governors, Senators, foreign Diplomats, Teachers — 
all joined the solemn march. It was as a composite 
picture representative of all the diversity of talents 
which had made the martyr supreme in so many 
useful fields of vigorous endeavor. Guns boomed 
upon the battery and echoing answers flung back 
the requiem from warships in the bay. All busi- 
ness closed its doors, and massed citizenship 
thronged the packed thoroughfares to render 
homage that was richly due. Death brought im- 
reserved, universal gratitude to the fimeral bier. 
The affections of a nation, shocked by tragedy into 
completest realization of its love and loss, paid 
rich toll. The whole story of the United States 
does not disclose a more appealing epic. 

Over the flag-draped coffin, deposited in Trinity 
Churchyard's gate, the heart-wrung Morris poured 
out the impassioned eloquence that spoke for a 
stricken people. 

"Hamilton disdained concealment," Morris 
cried. "Knowing the purity of his heart, he bore 
it, as it were, in his hand, exposing to every pas- 
senger its inmost recesses. Generous indiscretion 

295 



'Qi^f)t (Creates;! American 

subjected him to censure from misrepresentation. 
His speculative opinions were treated as deliberate 
designs. But I declare to you before God, in whose 
presence we are now so especially assembled, that 
in his most private and confidential conversations, 
his sole subject of discussion was your freedom and 
happiness. He never lost sight of your interests. 
For himself he feared nothing ; but he feared that bad 
men might, by false professions, acquire your con- 
fidence and abuse it to your ruin. He was ambi- 
tious only of glory, but he was deeply solicitous 
for you." 

Until sun-down, the bells of Manhattan tolled 
the knell of parting life. New York, and all the 
people wore mourning for a month, the Bar for 
six weeks. Never in human contribution to re- 
publican institutions and the destinies of progres- 
sive, autonomous freedom, had one man done so 
much in so few years. A modest monument, in 
due time, was raised above his grave. Indeed, it 
is so modest as to be nothing more than incon- 
spicuous in this modern day when grateful pos- 
terity has been so prodigal in memorializing its 
debt to other patriots who helped make possible the 
institutions of the United States. Upon it stands 
this moderate inscription : 

296 




By Underwood & Underwood 

Hamilton's Tomb in Trinity Churchyard, New York City 



^f)t (^reatesft American 

To the Memory of 

ALEXANDER HAMILTON 

The Corporation of Trinity Have Erected This 

Monument 

In Testimony Of The ir Respect 

For 

The Patriot Of Incorruptible Integrity 

The Soldier Of Approved Valour 

The Statesman Of Consummate Wisdom 

Whose Talents And Virtues Will Be Admired 

By 
Grateful Posterity 
Long After This Marble Shall Have Mouldered To 

Dust 
He Died July 12th, 1804, Aged 47. 

In the historical perspective which the unfold- 
ing years have brought to the mighty nation which 
he endowed with prodigal service and devotion, to 
this modest epitaph upon this modest tomb might 
properly be added a final, all-inclusive phrase, the 
verdict of posterity — "The Greatest American." 



397 



PART THREE 



299 



ConcIus(tan 

It is of vastly less consequence to determine 
one "Greatest American" than it is to encotirage 
familiarity with all "Greatest Americans." In 
its dialectic conclusions, this ingenuous essay stands 
true to its foreword. Its fimdamental aspiration 
is to recall the minds of men and women to 
a more sustained and verified consideration of 
the whole history of their native land, particu- 
larly in relation to its fotmdations. The method 
chosen has been a challenge to America's mass 
habit, amounting almost to a legend, generally of 
excluding all but Washington and Lincoln from the 
catalogue of super-great. The same method shall 
persist in this epilogue. 

If Alexander Hamilton is not entitled, all things 
considered, to be called "The Greatest American," 
rebuttal must search history for its validating 
proofs; and such a search, regardless of its outcome, 
will make any pilgrim inspirationally stronger in 
fealty to the institutions of the United States. 

301 



Cte ^xtattit ilmerican 

This is one case where familiarity breeds respect 
rather than contempt. If, on the other hand, 
Hamilton deserves his wreath, consent to his 
decoration thusly, must carry with it accompany- 
ing consent that the basic, patriotic philosophies for 
which he strove and died, are the strongest threads 
in the fabric of American citizenship. Eliminat- 
ing things of faction and of partisan evolution from 
the record, no straight thinker can deny that a re- 
naissance in these philosophies — imselfish loyalty, 
constructive public service, imperishable fealty to 
the Constitution and its purport, unhyphenated 
dedication of every conscience to the paramoimt 
welfare of the United States — would be a blessed 
benediction upon American to-morrows. In either 
event, then, the study is worth while. 

Opinion is not fact. It is merely the interpreta- 
tion of fact. No opinion can claim infallibility. 
One man's "Greatest American" may be quite as 
eligible to title as another's. American oppor- 
timities, down through the years, have developed 
a tremendous corps of leaders from among whom 
seemly choice is defensible in a variety of exalted 
directions. So catholic is this invitation that 
Thomas Jefferson, though necessarily denied any 
such credentials by any partisan of Hamilton's, 

302 



^i)t (Hreatejft iSmerican 

can be builded into formidable posture by any 
advocate who is willing to dissect the story of his 
life and works under sympathetic microscope. 
There are powerful arguments, depending on the 
point of view, that may be advanced for other 
favorites — from Roger Williams down to Wilson. 
There are no chains or formula to restrict imagina- 
tion or analysis in these respects. For George 
Washington and Abraham Lincoln, there exists a 
positively proprietary right to primal fame. Their 
eligibility is an axiom. All these estimates de- 
pend upon the nature of the rule and measure that 
shall be supplied. 

But if "The Greatest American" — which, be it 
understood, is a relative phrase and not a pretense 
that the maximimi, foreclosing type of excellence 
has been attained beyond competitive improve- 
ment — is that faithful citizen who has displayed 
the widest diversity of communally useful talents, 
it is the contention of this volume that choice 
must lie between Benjamin Franklin, Theodore 
Roosevelt and Alexander Hamilton. 

Then, if the final quest be for that devoted 
patriot whose diversity of talents has functioned 
most concretely for the people and the institutions 
of the United States, it is the contention of this 

303 



tlTfje (^reatesft iSmerican 

volume that logic leads to Hamilton and names 
him first. 

Speaking in terms of concrete service, there is 
scarcely anything that may be said for others that 
may not be said for him; and the eloquent differ- 
ence is that while others usually depend upon one, 
great, paramount motif for their fame, Hamilton's 
career encompasses all these motifs, like a melting 
pot. Roscoe Conkling, the tremendous character 
who represented New York in the United States 
Senate for many years, once said: "Alexander 
Hamilton, he was the greatest man ever produced 
by this hemisphere.'" 

Lincoln made the preservation of Union supreme 
over every other consideration in his tremendous 
service to America and to mankind. In this pos- 
ture, however, he displayed no more uncompromis- 
ing fidelities than did Hamilton three-quarters of a 
century before. It has been said by one historian' 
that Lincoln "lingered in the era of Sam Adams 
and Patrick Henry rather than that of Riifus King 
and Alexander Hamilton." Only in the literal 
sense that Lincoln seemed to find greater inspira- 

* Quoted in address by Thomas Redfield Proctor at 
Hamilton College, June 17, 1918. 

* Robert W. McLaughlin's Washington and Lincoln. 

304 



Kf)t #reate£ft JUmerican 

tion in the Declaration of Independence than in 
the Constitution, if we are to judge by his writings, 
can this parallel be true. Remembering Henry's 
refusal of a Virginia seat in the Constitutional 
Convention in 1787 and his vehement opposition 
to Virginia's ratification of the Constitution in 
1788; remembering how the whole cause of Union, 
its chance of healthy birth and sturdy youth, hung 
utterly and absolutely upon the successful forma- 
tion and acceptance of this Constitution; remem- 
bering how Hamilton dared to sign the Constitu- 
tion, singly and alone for the pivotal State of New 
York, and how he faced and conquered the hostile 
vendetta which sought the destruction of both the 
Constitution and the Union; remembering, in- 
cidentally, that Hamilton was one of the pillars of 
the first American Abolitionist society — formed in 
1784 to accomplish gradual and legal emancipation 
— and that he always refused to own a slave; it is 
difficult to understand how any appropriate parallel 
in history can do other than put Lincoln and 
Hamilton in common bracket. Every tribute to 
Lincoln's sturdy and unyielding purpose to save 
the Union is a corollary tribute to Hamilton's 
equally sturdy and unyielding purpose to give the 
Union effective creation. A stream can rise no 



tlDfje (Greatest American 

higher than its source. Hamilton was the source, 
if Lincoln was the preserver, of effective Union. 

Turn back to the eulogies describing Lincoln in 
the opening chapter of this book. Extract some of 
the meaty sentences with which Lincoln's advo- 
cates verify their choice. Contemplate these sen- 
tences in the abstract; and see how perfectly they 
fit Hamilton as well as Lincoln. ''Only divine 
providence covJd have given us for a great hour of 
need a man who took possession of the hour and 
lived up to all of its demands in a perfectly human 
fashion." "A martyr whose memory will become 
more precious as men learn to prize those principles 
of constitutional order and those rights — civil, 
political and human — for which he was made a 
sacrifice." "He was a man of virion and a man 
who had the capacity for putting his vision into 
accomplishment." "His fine fidelity to the basic 
ideals of America." "The service he rendered his 
country is unparalleled." "His pitiless logic for 
the right." "The sterling common sense with 
which he guided the country through the greatest 
peril of its national life." "He had all the talents 
of ability of thought, of breadth of sympathy, and 
power of will." "He was the whole history of the 
American people of his time." "His singleness of 

306 



^fje i^reatesit American 

purpose to fulfill his obligation and his oath." 
"The statesmanship, almost inspired, which, after 
having formulated in terms never paralleled for 
lucidity, the duty of a nation face to face with a 
crisis involving its existence, sustained it through 
the trials, reverses and sufferings." 

In the light of the exhibits that have been sub- 
mitted in the second section of this volume, can it 
be denied that every one of these high-spot apos- 
trophes belong to Alexander Hamilton? Not 
that they do not belong to Lincoln, too. That is 
not the point. Of course, they belong to Lincoln. 
The point is that the student who hunts biographi- 
cal history with analytical eye, finds practically all 
the dominating greatness which has marked all 
other great Americans, in the composite character 
and service of Hamilton. And Lincoln is no excep- 
tion to the rule. There is not a quoted word in 
the preceding paragraph w^hich does not accurately 
describe Hamilton, even as it accurately describes 
Lincoln. Even in the extraordinary test of eman- 
cipation, it may well be contended that it was no 
greater achievement to release half-a-nation of 
black men from the bonds of physical slavery, than 
it was to release a whole nation of white men from 
the bonds of chaos. It is not argued that Hamil- 

307 



^f)t (©reateist American 

ton was greater than Lincoln in these particular 
respects which deservedly sanctify the blessed 
Lincolnian memories. It is merely argued that he 
was equally as great; and then, that he went on 
into still other fields of human service, which Lin- 
coln but slightly touched or did not touch at all, 
and continued his same colossal stride. 

Washington's dominating credits relate to win- 
ning independence, as a soldierly master of treach- 
erous situations, and to consolidating the benefits 
thereof in permanent, republican institutions. In 
these aims, however, he had no zeals that outran 
those of the Military Aide, who was his constant 
counselor and confidant, nor of the Secretary 
of the Treasury, who was Coadjutor-President 
through every crisis that confronted the Republic's 
original administrations. Without Washington's 
calm grip upon the confidence of the people, sup- 
ported by a divinity of unselfish and persevering 
devotion to the cause which was his life, Hamil- 
ton's far-flimg undertakings, supported always by 
his Chief, might have suffered premature anaemia 
and fateful demise. On the other hand, without 
Hamilton's powers of vivid exhortation and expres- 
sion, the Revolution might not have been organized 
and maintained; without his resolution and per- 

308 



^Oe i^reatcgt American 

suasion, the Constitutional adventure would never 
have been launched; and without his towering 
capacities, serving every legislative and adminis- 
trative emergency, Washington's administrations 
might have been clogged to death. Without Ham- 
ilton, it is probable there would have been no 
"Farewell Address" — the clinging trademark on 
the Father's blessed fame. Colonel Pickering, 
Postmaster- General, Secretary of War, and later 
Secretary of State in Washington's Cabinet, con- 
sidered Hamilton by far the greatest man of his 
time and country, ranking him without hesitation 
above Washington.' George Ticknor Curtis, the 
eminent historian, years later wrote: "The ideas 
of a statesman like Hamilton, earnestly bent on 
the discovery and inculcation of truth, do not pass 
away. Wiser than those by whom he was sur- 
rounded, with a deeper knowledge of the science 
of government than most of them, and constantly 
enunciating principles which extended far beyond 
the temporizing policy of the hour, the smiles of 
his opponents only prove to posterity how far he 
was in advance of them." Guizot, profoimd 
student, said: "Hamilton must be classed among 
the men who have best known the vital principles 
' Life of Hamilton, by Lodge. 

309 



^{je ^ttaieat American 

and fundamental conditions of government. There 
is not in the Constitution of the United States, an 
element of order, of force or of duration, which he 
has not powerfully contributed to introduce into it 
and to give it a predominance." The truth is that 
he was the brains of the pilot house when the Ship 
of State started on her perilous journey down the 
lanes of time. In 1794, Madison complained of 
Hamilton's "mentorship to the Commander-in- 
Chief. " ' A year later, Jefferson wrote to Madison : 
' ' Hamilton is really a colossus. Without numbers, 
he is an host within himself." Even Burr con- 
fessed : ' ' He who puts himself on paper with Hamil- 
ton is lost." John Adams, speaking of his own 
Administration, said: "Hamilton was all the time 
the Commander-in-Chief of the House of Repre- 
sentatives, of the Senate, of the Heads of Depart- 
ments, of General Washington, and last and least 
if you will it, of the President of the United States." 
Lord Bryce, in his admirable and discerning work 
on The American Commonwealth, bears this testi- 
mony from an imprejudiced vantage ground: "One 
cannot note the disappearance of this brilliant 
figure (Hamilton), to Europeans the most inter- 
esting in the earlier history of the Republic, with- 
' Letters and Other Writings of James Madison. 

310 



^fje (Sreatejft ilmerican 

out the remark that his countrymen seem to have 
never, either in his Ufetime or afterward, duly 
recognized his splendid gifts. Washington is, in- 
deed, a far more perfect character. . . . But 
Hamilton, of a virtue not so flawless, touches us 
more nearly, not only by the romance of his early 
and his tragic death, but by a certain ardor and 
impulsiveness, and even tenderness of soul, joined 
to a courage equal to that of Washington himself. 
Equally apt for war and civil government, with a 
profundity and amplitude of view rare in practical 
soldiers or statesmen, he stood in the front-rank of 
a generation never surpassed in history." 

Any credits given Washington for inaugurating 
the Government, it surely must be confessed, must 
be shared with Hamilton ; just as any credits given 
Lincoln for saving Union, must be shared with his 
lineal predecessor in these works and faiths. In- 
deed, if an intensely practical measure be applied, 
all possibility of argument must disappear. "Fi- 
nancial integrity is a test of political institutions," 
writes Professor Sumner in his Hamiltonian bi- 
ography. ' Whenever they decay or are corrupted, 
the evil invariably manifests itself in financial 

' Alexander Hamilton, by Professor William Graham 
Sumner. 

311 



tIDije ^vtsittit American 

abuses. The financial vice of our Revolutionary 
period was repudiation, both public and private. 
"It was the States which were the stronghold of 
it; it was the Union which had to combat it. 
Therefore, the contest with anarchy and repudia- 
tion was the great work which went to the making 
of this nation at the end of the last century, and 
Alexander Hamilton was one of the leading heroes 
of it." Hamilton, as a matter of cold truth was 
more than "one of the heroes." He was "the 
hero." He was the foimder of the structure of 
soimd federal finance and public credit. His 
brain was the mint in which its plan was coined; 
his ideas were its currency and asset. Therefore, 
since Sumner is right in putting "financial in- 
tegrity" at the base of "political institutions," 
Hamilton was at the base of the Republic. He 
had neither peer nor competitor in these vital, ele- 
mentary responsibilities. Where other strong men 
had failed, he succeeded. Otir history does not 
disclose, then or since, a man who could have taken 
his place. Certainly Washington pretended no 
such talents. His most earnest enemies, like Jef- 
ferson and Gallatin and Monroe, lived to honor his 
works by the sincerest of all compliments — emula- 
tion and perpetuation. He was one man among 

312 



^\)t (Srcategt American 

millions raised for the occasion. He alone was 
equal to the basic exigency which was the rock 
whereon Washington's Administration — and the 
whole great republican experiment — ^was to build 
or break. Without him, or some other like him 
who did not appear, but whom God and the neces- 
sity might have erected in his absence, America's 
aspirations would have been bankrupt and her 
destiny foreclosed. 

All this does not mean, or intend to insinuate 
the absurd pretense, that in some particulars both 
Lincoln and Washington were not greater, in char- 
acter and service, than was Hamilton. Tolstoy 
has called Lincoln "a miniature Christ." John 
Drinkwater, the great Briton who has been so 
brilliant in his Lincolnian interpretations, has 
summed up Lincoln as the embodiment of all 
Anglo-Saxon virtues. Lafayette declared : " In my 
idea General Washington is the greatest man, for I 
look upon him as the most virtuous." If the case 
were epitomized in a word, it can be said that 
Washington and Lincoln possessed a spirituality 
of leadership that was lacking in Hamilton's neces- 
sarily practical career — though there are epics in 
Hamilton's career which approach the sublime in 
character. The word "spirituality," in this con- 

313 



tE^f)e i^reatesft American 

nection, does not refer to religion. Phillips Brooks 
once said: "No man can come to true greatness 
who has not felt in some degree that his life belongs 
to his race, and that what God gives him, He gives 
him for mankind." This sort of spirituality, 
Hamilton had in surpassing measure. As for his 
contact with all these higher aspirations, he was 
a sincere and earnest Christian.' He said of 
Christianity in his firm and positive way: "I have 
studied it, and I can prove its truth as clearly as 
any proposition ever submitted to the mind of 
man." But the spirituality of lofty moral char- 
acter, resting for its eternal dominion upon the 
influence of personality, rather than the urge of 
deeds alone, attaches to Lincoln and Washington in 
a deserved degree which Hamilton's combativeness 
and passions deny. Unquestionably, too, these are 
important elements that should enter the deter-' 
mination of ' ' The Greatest American. ' ' Hamilton 
must confess to certain blemishes that Washing- 
ton and Lincoln did not know. Yet it would be as 
unfair to rest a verdict exclusively upon these con- 
siderations called "spiritual" for want of a better 
word as it would to crown the man who was only 
our greatest economist, or only our greatest diplo- 
' Life of Hamilton, by John T. Morse, Jr. 

314 



tlTfjf (Sreatejit American 

mat, or only our bravest warrior; and it would be 
equally unfair to deny that Hamilton, upon many 
acid occasions, assayed pure gold in the exalted 
character which he disclosed to the ages. 

But it is diversity of talents, diversity of service, 
diversity of contribution in essentials to American 
life and institutions, that this volume emphasizes 
as the measure of the truest pre-eminence. Great- 
ness must be measured in the ratio of its composite 
elements; and more of these elements appeared in 
Hamilton than in any other man. He was not a 
"jack-of -all-trades." He was that rare novelty — 
a master of all trades. He was superior in more 
fields of human influence and action than any other 
American who ever lived. He had fully the equal 
of Franklin's intellect. "His intellect," says John 
Fiske, ' "seemed to have sprung forth in full ma- 
turity, like Pallas from the brain of Zeus." "I 
have very little doubt," said Chancellor Kent, 
upon one occasion, "that if General Hamilton had 
lived twenty years longer, he would have rivaled 
Socrates or Bacon, or any of the sages of ancient 
or modern times, in researches after truth and in 
benevolence to mankind. The active and pro- 
found statesman, the learned and eloquent lawyer, 

* Essays, Historical and Literary, Vol. II. 

315 



would probably have disappeared in a great degree 
before the character of the sage philosopher, in- 
structing mankind by his wisdom and elevating his 
country by his example." Franklin was a miracu- 
lously many-sided man. Along with Theodore 
Roosevelt and Hamilton, he could probably boast 
a greater diversity of talents than any other Ameri- 
can. Yet, save for his research in the natural 
sciences, there was nothing in his record which 
Hamilton could not have done, it is fair to assume, 
equally well, and which he did not equivalently do 
in related fields; and there are many Hamiltonian 
achievements that would have been notoriously 
impossible in Franklin's hands. 

Roosevelt, in our modern day, was Hamilton- 
esque in many reminiscent ways. He could do 
more different things and do them well than any 
other man with whom modem generations are 
familiar. Col. Raymond Robins of Chicago has 
put the case this way: "Theodore Roosevelt was 
equally at home with prize fighters and kings, with 
cow-boys, naturalists, writers, college professors 
and outdoor men. When we have reached 25 we 
begin to understand the real Lincoln. When we 
are 30, we grasp something of the calm, dignity 
and poise of Washington; but we have only to be 

316 



tKije ^vtattat American 

boys before we get the message of Roosevelt. " ' He 
was a soldier — but less conspicuously than Ham- 
ilton. He was at the same time a man of peace, 
bringing Russia and Japan together to compose 
their martial differences amid the granite hills of 
old New Hampshire. Hamilton, too, was a man 
of peace, as emphasized courageously in his in- 
spiration and defense of the Jay Treaty with 
England. Roosevelt built the Panama Canal. 
But Hamilton was the original, lonesome propo- 
nent, in America, of the theory and system of 
developing waterways at federal expense. Roose- 
velt was the greatest modern prophet of an aroused 
and vigilant nationalism. But Hamilton was the 
original and foremost oracle that nationalism ever 
had. Both could command the emotions of an 
audience with tongue or pen. Both were evangel- 
ists in public and private honesty and honor. Yet, 
when all is said and done, Hamilton displayed a 
genius for concrete creation, in systems and ma- 
chinery of government, which Roosevelt may have 
possessed, but never faced the need to show; and 
Hamilton catered to crises out-weighing in vitality 
anything confronting the strenuous "T. R." in 
the more sedate days of the nation's life. 
' Chicago Tribune, May 24, 192 1. 

317 



Clje i^reatesit American 

You find, each time you analyze, that the major 
elements of greatness that have entered the careers 
of other men, are all duplicated in this "Little 
Lion." No man is perfect. The purest mortals 
have had their faults. It is within these human 
limitations that human tests must be applied. 
But within these limitations, Hamilton seems to 
have been a composite of the genius of his coun- 
try, from the beginning down to date. One con- 
tributor to this book's preliminary symposium 
mentioned Webster as first favorite. Apply the 
rule and get the same result. Judge Ambrose 
Spencer, one of the distinguished jurists of his 
time, is quoted' in the following pointed compli- 
ment and comparison : ' * Alexander Hamilton was 
the greatest man this country ever produced. I 
knew him well. I was in situation often to ob- 
serve and study him. I saw him at the bar and at 
home. He argued cases before me while I sat as 
Judge on the bench. Webster has done the same. 
In power of reasoning, Hamilton was the equal of 
Webster; and more than this can be said of no man. 
In creative power, Hamilton was infinitely Web- 
ster's superior. It was he, more than any other 
man, who thought out the Constitution of the 

* Life of Hamilton, by Senator Lodge. 

318 



Wi)c (Creates!! American 

United States and the details of the Govern- 
ment of the Union; and out of the chaos that 
existed after the Revolution, raised a fabric, 
every part of which is instinct with his thought. 
I can truly say that hundreds of politicians 
and statesmen of the day get both the web and 
woof of their thoughts from Hamilton's brains. 
He, more than any other man, did the thinking of 
his time." 

As it is in comparison with Webster, so is it in 
comparison with Samuel J. Tilden, whom another 
contributor would give first consideration. Til- 
den's claim is rested on his ready and patriotic 
acquiescence in the presidential verdict of 1876 
when an Electoral Commission counted him out of 
the White House and seated Rutherford B. Hayes 
by a thin and always-questioned majority of one 
vote. "Had Tilden asked us," declares former 
Vice-President Marshall, "we would have grabbed 
our gims, gone to Washington and endeavored to 
seat him regardless of the result to the peace of the 
RepubHc." It is almost uncanny to find that 
even in this unusual and peculiar circumstance of 
high, patriotic service, Hamilton's omnifarious 
career again provides relative precedent and 
parallel. The presidential elections of 1800, when 

319 



Wbt ^vtatt^t American 

a tie vote between Thomas Jefferson and Aaron 
Burr threw the decision into the House of Repre- 
sentatives, might easily have hastened a Civil 
War by sixty years. The crisis was infinitely 
nearer breach and disaster than in 1876. In the 
frenzied wrath engendered by defeat at the polls, 
the Federalists holding the balance of power in the 
House, were keen to throw their support to Burr, 
nominally nmning as a vice-presidential candidate 
with Jefferson, and thus square political accoimts 
with the great Democrat who was their maximum 
and magnified antipathy. The temper of the times 
ran strong on both sides of the political equation. 
If the Federalists had pursued this reckless purpose 
they would have precipitated two-fold menace: 
first, the probability of open, popular revolt by the 
partisans of the candidate who was clearly the 
country's electoral choice; second, the probability 
of national disintegration under the presidential 
auspices of an intriguing, seditionary charlatan. 
Just one force and influence stayed this dual catas- 
trophe — the towering, political integrity of Alex- 
ander Hamilton, who refused to soil his hands 
upon a thieving conspiracy, who stood like the 
rock of ages against such electoral debauchery, 
who whipped his partisans into obedience to com- 

320 



mon sense and decency, and who insisted that the 
crowning honors of the nation should be bestowed 
upon his arch poHtical enemy. Whatever the 
measure of Tilden's service in 1876, it is out- 
matched by Hamilton's in 1800. To poHtical in- 
tegrity and unselfishness, there is no greater monu- 
ment in the life of any American who ever lived. 
Indeed, it is the judgment of as profound a scholar 
as Lord Bryce' that Hamilton's assassination four 
years later may be traced back to this occasion. 
Says Bryce: "Hamilton's influence at last induced 
the Federalist members to vote for Jefferson 
as a person less dangerous to the country than 
Burr. His action — highly patriotic, for Jefferson 
was his bitter enemy — cost him his life at Burr's 
hands." Thus, even in the unique circumstance 
presented by Tilden's claims on primal fame, 
Hamilton again proves credentials that are all- 
inclusive. 

John Marshall, Chief Justice of the Supreme 
Court of the United States from January 31, 1801, 
to his death on July 6, 1835, belongs high up on 
any American scroll of fame. His reports, filling 
some thirty invaluable volumes, are cherished and 
imperishable expositions of American Constitu- 

* The American Commonwealth, by Lord Bryce. 

321 



tlTfje ^xtattit American 

tional law. Yet, once again, Hamilton displays 
paralleling talents. Because of his vast legal 
learning and capacity, he was repeatedly urged as 
eligible for the exact position which Marshall filled ; 
and every reliable authority corroborates the opin- 
ion that if he had taken it, abjuring the other 
multitudinous pursuits which taxed his busy life 
with almost unbelievable responsibilities, he would 
have been no less a decoration to the bench than 
was the great Marshall himself. Indeed, Hamil- 
ton's pioneering creation of the doctrine of "im- 
plied powers" — "the most formidable weapon 
in the armory of the Constitution," as has been 
said — was decidedly more of an original credit 
to him, under the inceptive circumstances sur- 
rounding its courageous promulgation, than to 
Marshall, who in subsequent decisions merely 
gave it the authority of law; and such exhibits, 
while detracting nothing from Marshall's stature, 
must be conceded to put Hamilton into possession 
of pre-eminent qualities in this field as in all 
others. So far as the Constitution, its establish- 
ment, its interpretation and its stabilization are 
concerned, whether gauged as a matter of philoso- 
phy or jurisprudence, Hamilton needs yield prece- 
dence to no man. "In the end," wrote a friendly 

322 



tCije ^reategt American 

biographer in 1856/ " the predilections of this great 
man and profound statesman were fully realized. 
The Constitution, which he chiefly elaborated, 
was finally adopted ; and has since become the sub- 
ject of constant eulogy of myriads of eloquent 
tongues, and has received the admiration of the 
whole civilized world. The merit of Hamilton in 
connection with it can now scarcely be estimated; 
but when a thousand years of unequaled national 
prosperity and glory shall have rolled over this 
confederacy, which his great plastic hand moulded 
into so compact, so beautiful, and so consistent a 
mass ; when five hundred millions of human beings 
shall inhabit this continent, turning by their thrifty 
industry all her boundless plains and valleys into 
blooming and fruitful gardens ; and when, from the 
Atlantic to the Pacific shore an empire of freemen 
shall here live and reign imder the benign control 
of that Constitution, being ten times greater than 
any previous empire that ever existed on earth; 
then, indeed, may the vast services and the vener- 
able name of Alexander Hamilton be cherished 
with the profound reverence and the high appre- 
ciation which they abundantly deserve." 

' The Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Samuel 
Schmucker. 

" 323 



It is scarcely possible to name any man eligible, 
however remotely, to classification among great 
Americans without finding his essential achieve- 
ments — whatever happens to be the true trade- 
mark on his fame — strikingly matched, in some 
degree, in Hamilton's fertile career, because it is 
scarcely possible to name an essential field of use- 
ful action wherein Hamilton did not wear epaulets. 
The analyses we have applied to a few, apply 
equally to the many. Hamilton was more nearly 
omniscient than any other American who ever 
lived. More American policies and more Ameri- 
can institutions trace parentage to him than to 
any other mortal. If John Ruskin was right when 
he declared "greatness is the aggregation of 
minuteness," Hamilton was great in a superlative 
degree. An index, confined exclusively to those 
agencies and charts of government for which he 
was the original sponsor as detailed in the preced- 
ing pages of this chronicle, would touch the funda- 
ments of every department of public service, and 
almost every phase of foreign and domestic rela- 
tions. President Nicholas Murray Butler of 
Columbia University has said:' "He represented 
the highest type of human product, a great intel- 

' Title-page of The Conqueror, by Gertrude Atherton. 

324 



tE^i)t (^reateiit ^mtxican 

lect driven for high purposes by an imperious will." 
The scope and diversity of these purposes and 
their fruits comprise his unapproachable title to 
pre-eminent American consideration. It does 
not justly suffice to say that this describes merely 
our greatest constructive statesman, as is the ver- 
dict of some commentators who acknowledge Ham- 
ilton's qualities, but delimit their latitude. Far 
beyond such political confines is the genius of the 
greatest orator, the greatest writer, the greatest 
lawyer of his time. This spells culture, not states- 
manship. Far beyond any analytical confines at 
all is the inestimable influence in behalf of success- 
ful Revolution which he flung into the Republic's 
pre-natal era, and in behalf of stabilized and 
ordered Government which became the post- 
Revolutionary era's saving grace. This is more 
than culture and statesmanship combined: it is 
supreme personality. The Army gives him a dash 
of the cavalier. The tremendous odds against 
which he won his major triumphs — opposition 
which avoided no extremes in scurrility and per- 
sonal vituperation — bring him into sympathetic 
concert with the greatest of our leaders, all of whom 
invariably have suffered similar vicissitudes. ' * His 
fearlessness, openness and directness turned rivals 

325 



^Ije (Sreatejit American 

into enemies, irritated smaller men, and aroused 
their malicious desire to pull him down."' Last 
but not least, if "The Greatest American" must 
have lived a colorful drama in order to complete 
the finest composite picture of his race, Hamilton 
was a penniless orphan at tender eleven; a self- 
made master of his country's destinies at brilliant 
thirty-two; an assassinated martyr to national 
fidelities at supernal forty-seven. The whole 
picture is without a peer. 

It is this composite greatness that should govern 
in pursuit of our maximimi American type. Paren- 
thetically, a parallel might be drawn from the 
heroisms that we venerate in the story of American 
participation in The Great War. "The Greatest 
Hero" is the unknown martyr whom it is proposed 
to bring from among the tmidentified American 
dead in France and bury in Arlington National 
Cemetery with the highest honors the Republic 
can bestow — ^just as England buried an unknown 
"Tommy" in Westminster Abbey amid Britain's 
great — just as France buried an unknown "Poilu" 
beneath the historic Arc de Triomphe. He is our 
"Greatest Hero" because he is composite. No- 

' Alexander Hamilton, by Professor Wiliam Graham 
Sumner. 

326 



^te (^vtattat American 

body will know — nobody will care — whether he 
be from Maine or Michigan, from Florida or Ore- 
gon; whether boy or man; whether white or black; 
whether Jew or Gentile; whether native-bom or 
naturalized alien; whether Cathohc or Protestant 
or neither; whether of one political party or an- 
other. He will be The American Patriot. Of 
that we shall be sure. So far as these other char- 
acters are concerned, he can fit any of these various 
alternative roles equally well. Any of us can think 
of him in whatever terms best suits our fancy. In 
other words, it is the composite character he repre- 
sents that builds him into the most typically 
superb example of American sacrifice and Ameri- 
can democracy. If he were less composite, he 
would be less typical. Possibly this reasoning 
argues most strongly in favor of the contention 
that "The Greatest American" should be an ideal- 
istic figure, rather than a definite personality. 
But, from the viewpoint of this volume's analysis, 
it thunders in support of the proposition that, if 
we are academically to choose one "Greatest 
American," he should be that American whose 
talents and capacities and services to his cotmtry 
are most nearly the composite of all talents and 
capacities and services. It is on this score that 

327 



^ije (§reate£it American 

Alexander Hamilton defies successful competition. 

Some sophists have said that Hamilton was not 
an American at all, because he was born in the 
West Indies. The answer is that there were no 
Americans, in the modern and proper usage of the 
word, until after the Republic was established. 
The best possible proof is the Constitution of the 
United States which prohibits the Presidency to 
any person "except a natural bom citizen, or a 
citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption 
of this Constitution.''^ Hamilton was eligible to 
the Presidency. He was as thoroughly the product 
of our soil and our environment as Washington 
himself. To rule him out would be the culminating 
futility in jealous ingratitude. 

Another viewpoint deals primarily with the 
relative importance of epochs, insisting that "The 
Greatest American" must have served the greatest 
relative era in our history. This resolves itself 
usually into an argument between the relative im- 
portance of the Washingtonian and the Lincolnian 
periods. Hamilton's advocate may well welcome 
such an argument with avidity. Creation is a 
greater task than preservation. If the flood wall 
that protects a great city is swept away by the 

' Article 2, Section i. 

328 



^te (^reatesit American 

invasion of a relentless sea, it is a tremendous task 
— a task of inestimable burden and importance — 
to rebuild the wall. But it is not so great a task 
as was the wall's original construction. The 
pioneering has been done. Courageous foresight 
has demonstrated the feasibility of the plan. It 
has been proven that the plan will "work." The 
foundations are down. The long habit of living 
behind the flood wall has accustomed the people 
to respect a flood wall, despite its temporary- 
breach, and to desire and to require its perpetua- 
tion. The value of a flood wall has been demon- 
strated. Indeed, the very catastrophe which 
either impends or happens when the wall gives way 
in any sector emphasizes the need for the wall and 
creates a common instinct for its preservation. 
These factors were absent when the first creator of 
the wall faced a dominant sea upon one side, and 
a skeptical, disorganized and fearful people upon 
the other side. The first creator of the wall had to 
conquer both a menace and the thing menaced. 
For him there were no land-marks, no precedents, 
no charts, no foundations. His is the greater 
labor not only because it is the original labor, but 
also because it sets the mold for all labor there- 
after. The power that creates would manifestly 

329 



^t^t i^reatesst Mmttitan 

possess the power to preserve. But the power that 
preserves might lack the power to create . Changing 
the metaphor, we who can cultivate a field of wheat 
cannot make so much as one single blade of grass. 
There is nothing greater than creation. 

Bring these similes home to our specific subject. 
The case may be rested upon the testimony of 
Theodore Roosevelt. ' After putting Washington 
above all other Americans, with specific reference 
to Lincoln who, said he "alone is entitled even to 
stand second," Roosevelt argued the preferential 
importance of the Revolutionary era by a com- 
parison of estimate upon the work of other great 
men whom we see in a perspective free from legend- 
ary distortion. "The truth is," wrote Roosevelt, 
"that in 1776, our main task was to shape new 
political conditions, and then to reconcile our 
people to them ; whereas, in 1 860, we had merely to 
fight fiercely for the preservation of what was 
already ours. . . . Franklin, Hamilton, Jeffer- 
son, Adams and their fellows most surely stand 
far above Seward, Sumner, Chase, Stanton and 
Stevens, great as were the services which these, 
and those like them, rendered." This is the argu- 
ment of the flood wall and the grain translated into 

' Roosevelt's Life of Gouverneur Morris. 

330 



^i)t (greatejft American 

terms of American history. Says another his- 
torian:' "When the new Government was set in 
motion under the Presidency of Washington, with 
Hamilton, the typical Federalist, as the organiz- 
ing statesman, . . . this country was inferior in 
population and wealth to Holland; it stood but 
little above the level of Denmark or Portugal." 
Surely, as Roosevelt has said, the creation of the 
United States of America amid such conditions, 
must be admitted to have been a greater miracle 
than the preservation of its natural and habitual 
Union three-quarters of a century later. Having 
once resolved this equation — not, pray, with the 
remotest thought of disparaging the stupendous 
inspiration and service of the saintly Lincoln and 
his time, but rather merely to recall modern 
America to a clearer vision of its debt to men and 
days more readily ignored because more remote — 
the balance of the analysis loses most of its com- 
plexity. All things considered, with an eye to 
diversity of talents, service and appeal, Alexander 
Hamilton was the "colossus" of his time, as even 
Jefferson explicitly acknowledged. "His extra- 
ordinary genius, knowledge and activity would 

' Hannis Taylor in The Origin and Growth of the American 
Constitution. 

331 



have made him illustrious in any society, but his 
character was in some respects beyond the grasp of 
common minds. . . . He is to be regarded above 
all other men as the creator of the institutions of 
modem liberty."' "Among the foimders of the 
American nation, Alexander Hamilton deserves a 
place of honor beside the immortal Washington," 
declares Prof. Pay son J. Treat, head of the His- 
tory Department at Stanford University, Cali- 
fornia. "In intellectual brilliancy and construc- 
tive genius he surpassed his fellow- workers. His 
services in securing the adoption of the Constitu- 
tion and in building up a strong Federal Gov- 
ernment have rarely been adequately recog- 
nized." 

When Prof. E. E. Robinson, co-worker with 
Treat at Stanford, was asked the question, "Whom 
do you consider the greatest figure in the formative 
period of the Nation," his prompt reply was 
"Hamilton." 

There are, of course, as many different methods 
of measuring the quality of greatness in human 
leadership as there are minds to think them out. 
In Robert W. McLaughlin's illtiminating study of 

' American Society in the Days of Washington, by Rufus 
Wilmot Griswold, 1855. 

332 



W'tt ^reate^t American 

relative characters of Washington and Lincoln,' 
the author says: "Where the word 'great' is used 
of the few exceptional leaders in government, it 
has either of two meanings. It may mean the pos- 
session of some traits so in excess of those possessed 
by the ordinary man, as to cause all men to look 
with fear or admiration upon the one possessing 
them. Or it may mean the possession of traits in 
such perfect proportion, that the one possessing 
them, because he is normal, is great. The great 
man, in the first use of the word, startles the world. 
In the second use of the word, he wins the world." 

Hamilton's greatness squared with both these 
calculations. He possessed traits far in excess of 
average himian endowment, as testified by count- 
less achievements which history acknowledges to 
have been prodigious; equally, he possessed these 
traits in perfect proportion, as testified by his un- 
paralleled versatility in law, legislation and litera- 
ture whether as statesman, soldier or scholar, be 
the occasion war or peace. That he inspired either 
fear or admiration — with no middle ground — is 
proven, on the one hand, by historically demon- 
strated attachments which were fanatical in their 
love and trust, and, on the other hand, historically 

* McLaughlin's Washington and Lincoln. 

333 



tE^Jje i^rcatesit i^merican 

demonstrated antipathies which made him, next 
to Washington, the most venomously maligned 
man of his time. Quoting again from Griswold, 
who lived among men who personally knew Ham- 
ilton and his era:' "He inspired his friends with 
the warmest personal attachment, while he rarely, 
if ever, failed to make his enemies both hate and 
fear him." 

Certainly, he both "startled" and "won" the 
world. Witness, for typical example, the tribute 
of Talleyrand, who, whatever may have been his 
shortcomings, was the greatest world diplomat of 
his day. Said this astute and learned Frenchman : 
"I consider Napoleon, Fox and Hamilton the three 
greatest men of our time, and if I had to choose 
between the three, I would give without hesitation 
the first place to Hamilton."^ Or take a modem 
Briton's view. Says the essayist, Oliver: "In the 
great rebellion, Washington was the master spirit. 
In the great struggle to prevent the breaking of 
the Union, Lincoln was the master spirit. In his 
fitness for the particular crisis, Hamilton was the 
equal of these men, and it would be hard to find 

' American Society in the Days of Washington, by Rufus 
Wilmot Griswold, 1855. 

2 Etudes Sur La Republique. 

334 



higher praise. In character, he was their equal; 
in force of will; in efficiency; in practical wisdom; 
in coiirage and in virtue. But in a certain sense 
his greatness surpasses theirs, for it is more uni- 
versal and touches the interest of the whole world 
in a wider circle. He was great in action which is 
for the moment, and in thought which is for all 
time ; and he was great not merely as a minister of 
State, but as a man of letters. In constancy, it is 
customary to compare him with the younger Pitt, 
who was his contemporary. In political foresight 
and penetration, it is no extravagance to place him 
by the side of Burke. He shares with Fox his 
astounding genius for friendship."' 

If "startling" and "winning" the world be the 
rule to meastire greatness, Hamilton qualifies with- 
out a reservation. But, says McLaughlin: "There 
is a simplicity that is elemental, and has to do with 
the roots of character. Some one has said of 
Fenelon, 'Half of him would be a great man and 
stand out more clearly as a great man, than does 
the whole, because it would be simpler.' And 
these words, so pregnant with meaning, explain 
the failure of some great men to attain the rank of 
supreme greatness. Sometimes this lack of sim- 

' Alexander Hamilton, by Oliver. 

335 



Cfte <^reates;t American 

plicity is moral, again it is mental. Alexander 
Hamilton in sheer intellectual strength exerted in 
behalf of Government is without a peer in our his- 
tory. But it is this half of him that stands out 
more clearly as a great man." 

Unquestionably, intellectuality did thus domi- 
nate Hamilton's character. But it is poor ac- 
knowledgment of his moral strength to ignore the 
superb unselfishness with which he put aside every 
private concern and devoted his whole life to his 
country, to his own embarrassing impoverishment. 
Even Madison, his ultimate political foe, conceded 
this point in 1831 : ' "That he possessed intellectual 
powers of the first order, and the moral qualifica- 
tions of integrity and honor in a captivating de- 
gree, has been decreed to him by a suffrage now 
imiversal." 

"It was the absence of moral simplicity in Hamil- 
ton," continues McLaughlin, "which involved an 
appearance for a time imlike reality, which justi- 
fied the suspicion of his enemies." On the con- 
trary, the suspicions of his enemies were never 
justified; and never did they hazard an occasional 
challenge to the purity of his motives and the 
probity of his record, but they were overwhelmed 

^ Letters and Other Writings of James Madison. 

336 



^i)t (Greatest l^merican 

with prompt and unanswerable proofs of public recti- 
tude. Witness Giles with his luckless resolutions of 
censure in the early Congress— driven to humiliating 
defeat. Witness Freneau's discomfiture in his 
scandalous National Gazette, and Callender's hap- 
less boomerangs flung at Hamilton's steel integrity. 
It cannot be said that any "half of him stands 
out more clearly as a great man." If he were to 
be academically dissected, it could not be into 
"halves." It would be into fifths or tenths or 
twentieths, because no less a division could catalog 
his multanimous talents and characters and r61es 
and contributions to society and to mankind. It 
is this very diversity of genius, this supreme mas- 
tery of so many divergent arts and actions, this 
very inability to "halve" the man, as has been 
said repeatedly before, that fits him to a proper 
measure of pre-eminence. As for the key-virtue 
of "goodness," if, as McLaughlin says, it com- 
prehends, in addition to these other things, "sin- 
cerity" and "faith," it may well be asked whether 
"sincerity" could have had severer test than in 
Hamilton's expositions of the Constitution, or 
"faith" a greater demonstration than in Hamil- 
ton's sublime belief in the destinies of the Gov- 
ernment he helped to found? 

337 



tKije <^reates;t ^mtxitan 

No matter by what rule Hamilton's memory 
shall be tried, his title to pre-eminent claim upon 
American veneration can be verified. Schmucker 
wrote in 1856:' "The remarkable incidents of 
Hamilton's career will never lose their singular 
power to attract and instruct mankind, for they 
furnish impressive illustrations both of the bright- 
est and the basest elements of human character. 
The brightest all appertained to himself; the basest 
belonged to those by whom he was surrounded and 
assailed. Few men have ever lived whose virtues 
were so transcendent, whose motives were so dis- 
interested, whose usefulness was so extensive and 
so permanent ; yet there never lived a man against 
whom the envious, the malicious and the vile, 
fabricated so many baseless and absurd slanders, 
and illustrated by the aspersions which they cast 
upon him, and by the filthy slime of their hate 
with which they endeavored to pollute him, how 
despicable humanity in their own persons could 
become. To a very eminent degree Hamilton paid 
the natural penalty which superior genius and 
distinction must always suffer from the envious, 
the disappointed, and the obscure. . . . The 

^ The Life and Times of Alexander Hamilton, by Samuel 
M. Schmucker. 

338 



Cfje i^reatesit American 

name and fame of Hamilton will not die, until that 
dark day shall come when the name and fame of 
Washington will also be remembered no more." 

Modern American generations have come dan- 
gerously near an historical neglect which would 
have most pleased these who, in his day, 
maltreated their presiding genius. 

The compensations of gratitude which we have 
liberally bestowed upon others, we have too grudg- 
ingly withheld from him. For example, our na- 
tional Capitol bristles with statues and memorials 
to great Americans for whom we thus acknowledge 
a perpetual love and respect. America's friends 
from foreign shores — Lafayette, Rochambeau, 
Kosciuszko, Pulaski, Von Steuben — all are there; 
and all of them, if some black magic could endow 
them with an hour of life, would look about for 
Hamilton — and look in vain. Washington, Lin- 
coln, Jackson, Sherman, Scott, Webster, McPher- 
son, Thomas, McClellan, Sheridan, Dupont, 
Farragut, Witherspoon, Logan, Hancock, Rawlins, 
Franklin, Jones, Barry, Marshall, Garfield, Grant, 
Greene — all these, and many more, are immortal- 
ized. But nowhere is there statue or memorial 
to Hamilton, the peer of, if not superior to, them 
all in diversity of indispensable service to the 

339 



Obf ^xtaitui American 

Republic into which he wove the fabric of his soul. 

Happily this omission is now on its way to recti- 
fication. On June 3, 191 7, the following official 
self-explanatory statement was issued from the 
Treasury Department: 

"Secretary McAdoo today announced that a 
patriotic American woman of New York had 
offered to present to the people of the United 
States a statue of Alexander Hamilton to be erected 
in the city of Washington. This will be the first 
memorial in the national Capitol to the first 
Secretary of the Treasury. 

"The donor is an intense admirer of Hamilton 
and the greatness, genius and statesmanship with 
which he served the Republic during its formative 
days. Secretary McAdoo was very anxious to 
make public the name of the donor, in order that 
the people of the coimtry might know of her gener- 
ous and patriotic spirit, but as the gift was made 
in honor of Hamilton, she desired that fact to 
stand alone and not to mingle with it any credit 
to herself. The Secretary regrets that he is im- 
able to reveal the name of the noble woman who 
has made this splendid gift to the nation. 

"The sculptor selected is J. E. Fraser, who de- 
signed the five-cent coin now in circulation. 

340 




Model of the Hamilton Statue to be placed on the Treasury 
Plaza, Washington 



tE^fie <Sreate£ft American 

Mr. Fraser was chosen by the donor and is about 
to begin work on the memorial. 

"The statue will be erected on the south plaza 
of the Treasury Department. The site was 
selected by Secretary McAdoo and approved by 
the Fine Arts Commission. The Treasury Plaza 
was selected as the most appropriate location for 
the statue, because among Hamilton's many ser- 
vices to the nation, those rendered in respect to 
the fiscal system were both conspicuous and en- 
during. For that reason the Treasury site is 
regarded as singularly fitting. 

"For years an attempt has been made to erect 
a memorial to Hamilton, but without result. By 
Joint Resolution approved March 4, 1909, Congress 
appropriated $10,000 for the preparation of a site, 
and the erection of a pedestal upon which to place 
a memorial to be erected by the Alexander Hamil- 
ton National Memorial Association. This organi- 
zation for several years has been endeavoring to 
collect funds with which to erect the statue, and 
has collected six or seven thousand dollars for that 
purpose. It is the intention to utilize the Con- 
gressional appropriation and the collections of the 
Alexander Hamilton Memorial Association to pre- 
pare the site and erect the pedestal upon which 

341 



the statue donated will be placed. The donor of 
the statue did not know of the plans of the Alex- 
ander Hamilton Memorial Association when she 
proposed the gift, and desiring to present the com- 
plete statue, accepted the suggestion that the Con- 
gressional appropriation and the funds of the 
Association be used for the preparation of the site 
and pedestal. She will give the statue in its 
entirety." 

Thus, through the gift of a patriotic woman, 
whose identity the Treasury Department continues 
to refuse to disclose, but whose historical judgments 
are vindicated by her generosities, some visual re- 
minder of Hamilton at last is to rise in the Capitol 
City for the location of which, upon the banks of 
the Potomac, he was essentially responsible: and 
thus the long-sustained ambitions and fidelities of 
The Alexander Hamilton National Memorial Asso- 
ciation will shortly reach deserved fruition. At a 
meeting, December 30, 19 18, in the office of the 
Secretary of the Treasury, the President of the 
Alexander Hamilton National Memorial Associa- 
tion, Mr. Justice Josiah A. Van Ordsel of the Dis- 
trict of Colimibia Court of Appeals, reported upon 
the condition of the fund which his organization 
had been collecting through the years, and the 

342 



l^fje (Greatest ^mtvitan 

Commission, created by Act of Congress,* ap- 
proved general plans for the project. The sculptor 
is James Earle Fraser of New York, who has done, 
among other important works, the Roosevelt bust 
in the Senate Chamber in Washington, the monu- 
ment to John Hay in Cleveland, and the monument 
to Bishop Potter in the Cathedral of St. John The 
Divine, New York City. Mr. Fraser has selected 
Henry Bacon, New York, architect of the Lincoln 
Memorial in Washington, to design the pedestal. 

Appropriately, this statue will rise from the 
plaza of the Treasury Department, from whose 
archives all original Hamiltonian docimients have 
disappeared as a result of fire in 1833, but in whose 
fabric the whole Hamiltonian genius stands for- 
ever as the basic design. That it could be set, no 
less appropriately, in almost any other Depart- 
ment — because his works blessed every phase of 
the country's activities — suggests the gamut of his 
contributions to mankind. It will look out upon a 
nation which basks in the culmination of his fond- 
est hopes, and which, in a people's life, liberty and 
piursuit of happiness, passes not a single day with- 
out leaning upon some beneficent advantage that 
traces straight back to him for source. To those 

' Stat. L., Vol. 35, page 1170. 

343 



t!Df)e (^reatefit American 

who approach it with seeing eyes, it will be a thing 
of changing r61es and moods — now an implacable 
soldier, alight with the intrepidity of Monmouth 
Court House and Yorktown's flashing valor — 
now a decisive statesman, ordering the composite 
destinies of a new civilization — now a vivid orator, 
bending hostile majorities to his crystal aims and 
imperious will — now a brilliant scholar, dominat- 
ing the constructive culture of his time — now a 
coirrageous advocate, daring for the right with 
nimble, trenchant pen — now the masterful lawyer, 
leading his profession — now the architect and mas- 
ter builder of the Union, with human liberty upon 
his trestle board — now the Vigilante, defending 
the Constitution with immutable tenacity — now 
the founder of the public credit — now the first re- 
liance of George Washington, from the Battle of 
Long Island to the "Farewell Address" — now the 
sage economist, no less omniscient in commerce 
than in the arts — now the stricken martyr, sacri- 
ficed to his ideals, and moiu-ned with imiversal, 
soul-deep griefs — always, the spotless patriot, 
dedicated with imselfish singleness of purpose to 
the progressive welfare of the people and the 
institutions of the United States. 

Such, all things considered, was "The Greatest 

344 



^fje (greatesit American 

American." His real monument is neither a 
statue in his nation's Capitol nor his modest tomb 
in the metropolis that was his home. His real 
monument is The Republic. 



George Arliss, one of the greatest author-actors 
on the modern American stage, has written for this 
volimie its final word. Arliss is famed not only 
for his artistry in ''Disraeli" and "Paganini," but 
even more particularly for his faithful and inspir- 
ing work in 191 7 in "Hamilton" — which, with 
Mary P. Hamlin, he wrote, and in which he played 
an historic title role. This latter undertaking is the 
only major effort ever made to dramatize the life of 
Hamilton. Its classical success was a tribute alike 
to the subject and to its portrayer. It demon- 
strated beyond peradventure what an epic "The 
Greatest American" lived in his multicolored ca- 
reer. Keenly interested in every phase of Hamil- 
toniana, Arliss promptly accepted an invitation to 
close this sympositim. 

"I always get a pleasant feeling of satisfaction 
when I hear praise for Alexander Hamilton. It is 
not because I once helped to write a play about 
him that I consider him The Greatest American; 

345 



W^t i^reatejEft American 

or because I impersonated him on the stage. Those 
incidents were the result of my admiration of the 
man. 

"Hamilton may almost be said to have been an 
infant phenomenon, for he was under thirteen 
years of age when he was displaying amazing busi- 
ness capacity. Most infant phenomena cease to 
be remarkable as soon as they reach early man- 
hood. But Alexander Hamilton was a phenomenon 
at every stage of his life. 

"He had all the brilliancy of genius combined 
with an infinite capacity for taking pains. When 
one reviews the mass of correspondence from his 
own hand, with sheaves of matter on special sub- 
jects demanding the deepest thought and the most 
searching investigation, one is bound to wonder 
how he even found hours for sleep. 

"Who can name another statesman or politician 
with such capacity for bringing order out of chaos? 
When Congressmen and Senators were wrapping 
themselves in the American Flag and shouting In- 
dependence, it was Hamilton who realized that no 
country could be a great power except as its credit 
was preserved; that its credit must be good if it 
were to prosper. And so, he never rested until 
he had put the country on firm financial basis and 

346 



tKfie <§rcatesit i^merican 

had sounaly whipped those politicians who would 
have repudiated responsibilities. 

''His great outstanding attribute that commands 
oiiT respect and affection was courage. Not the 
coiu'age of the blind egoist or the imperious poli- 
tician, but the cotuage which has its roots in love 
of truth and of honorable dealing. He was The 
Greatest American." 



The Greatest American gave himself to The 
Greatest Nation in the cycles of Time. His Nation 
profligately ignores a priceless heritage in whatever 
degree it neglects or forgets his sturdy contribution 
to the ages. Its own perpetuated stability and 
eminence are dependent upon its devotion to the 
fundamentals of which he was supreme exemplar. 
In this present period of flux and uncertainty — 
this era of reconstruction and readjustment — 
America needs, as rarely before, the living spirit 
of Alexander Hamilton. We need his immutable 
loyalty to the Constitution, his unswerving faith in 
the Republic, his unhyphenated attachment to 
"America First." We need his incisive compre- 
hension of national requirements, national equities, 
national purposes and national possibilities. We 

347 



need his creeds, his vision, his ciilture, his stead- 
fastness, his courage. We need his love of honor 
and of truth. We need his counsel and his in- 
spiration. We need mass-intimacy with all that 
he was and always will be. No son or daughter 
of Columbia can truly know Hamilton and not be 
a safer, surer, prouder American citizen. It is as 
President Harding declared upon the opening pages 
of this work: "The greater modem familiar- 
ity with Hamiltonism may become, the greater 
will be modern fidelities to essential American 
institutions." 



348 



INDEX 



Abolition; Franklin advocates, 63; 
Hamilton promotes, 305; Ham- 
ilton compared with Lincoln, 
307 
Accounting, Federal system of, 

179 
Adams, John, 89, 98, 100, 120, 
252; opinion of Hamilton, 75, 
310 
Adams. John Quincy, quoted, 141 
Adams, Samuel, 58, 304 
Alderman, E. A., quoted, 37 
Ahen and Sedition Acts, 135 
Allen, Henry, quoted, 6 
"Americanus" Essays, 219 
Andrews, C. M., quoted, 56 
Annapolis Convention, 84, 114 
Anti-Federalist Party, 89, 185, 

188, 190 
Arliss, George, quoted, 34s 
Arnold, Benedict, 249, 263 
Atherton, Gertrude, quntod, 69 
Atherton's Conqueror, xiv. 



B 



Baker, Newton D., quoted, 36 
Battle of Long Island, 243 
Beck, James M., quoted, 30 
Bell, H. M., quoted, 9 
Beveridge, A. J., quoted, 28 
Borah, W. E., quoted, 47 
Brooks, S. D., quoted, 43 
Brown, John, 7 
Br>-ce, James, quoted, 42, 310, 

321 
Burch, Bishop, quoted, 10 
Burr, Aaron, 103, 107, 139, 225, 

310 



Burroughs, John, quoted, 24 
Burton, Marion L., quoted, 8 
Butler, Nicholas Murray, quoted, 
324 



Callender, attacks on Hamilton, 

75, 204, 234, 290, 337 
"Camillus" Essays, 96, 219 
Cannon, Joseph G., quoted, 21 
Capper, Arthur, quoted, 9 
Chamberlain, George, quoted, 32 
Christian Constitutional Society, 

137 
Churchill, Winston, quoted, 10 
Citizen Genet, 93, 218 
Clark, Champ, quoted, 28 
Clark, W. E., quoted, 40 
Clinton, Governor, 115, 116, 124, 

267 
Cobb, Frank, quoted, 39 
Cockran, Bourke, quoted, 24 
Congressional Inquiries into Ham- 
ilton, 90, 190, 337 
Connecticut ratified Constitution, 

126 
Constitutional Convention, New 

York, 86, 124, 273 
Constitutional Convention, Phila- 
delphia, first proposed, 114; 
meets, 85, 116 
Continental Congress, 81, no, 

114, 264 
" Continentalist " Essays, in, 176, 

198, 210 
Coolidge, Calvin, quoted, 45 
Cortelyou, George, quoted, 44 
Couden, Henry, quoted, 14 
Courts, Integrity of, 171 
Cox, James M., quoted, 54 



349 



Kntiex 



Croswell Case, 234 
Croucher Case, 236 
Crowder, Enoch H., quoted, 9 
Currency System, 87, 181, 278 
Curtis, Cyrus H. K., quoted, 61 



D 



Daniels, Josephus, quoted, 35 
Day, James R., quoted, 14 
Delaware, Washington crossing, 

244 
Delaware ratified Constitution, 

126 
Denby, Edwin, quoted, 22 
Dodge, Cleveland, quoted, 38 
Douglas, Stephen A., 52 
Duane, James, iii, 176 



E 



Edison, Thomas A., 7; quoted, 8; 

58,62 
Eliot, Charles W., quoted, 8, 143 



Faunce, W. H. P., quoted, 43 
Federalist Party, 88, 102, 103, 104, 

130, 183 
"Federalist," The, 85, 124, 130, 

143, 210, 215, 216, 228 
Ferris, W. N., quoted, 17 
Fess, S. D., quoted, 18 
Finley, John H., quoted, 8 
Florida Acquisition, 132, 257 
Franklin, Benjamin, xv, 19, 30, 

42, 50. 58, 61, 68, 203, 262, 315, 

316, 330, 339 
French Revolution, 92, 133, 218 
Frost, William G., quoted, 5 



Gage, Lyman J., quoted, 34 
Galbraith, F. W., quoted, 29 
Gallatin, Albert, 203, 312 
Garfield, James A., 46, 142, 293, 

339 
Georgia ratifies Constitution, 126 
Gillett, F. H., quoted, 28 
Gompers, Samuel, quoted, 6 



Greene, General, 243 
Gunsaulus, F. W., quoted, 8 

H 

Hadley, Arthur T., quoted, 44 

Hall of Fame, 42 

Hamilton, Alexander; birth, 74; 
great student, 76, 148; first 
literary effort, 207; schooling, 
77; first public appearance, 77, 
no, 176; enhsts, 78, 242; early 
battles, 243; Military Secretary 
to Washington, 79, 245; quarrels 
with Washington, 250; mission 
to Albany, 79, 248; married, 80; 
first pubHc office, 80, 112; in 
Continental Congress, 81, 114, 
264; goes to Annapolis Con- 
vention, 84, 114; sits in 
Constitutional Convention at 
Philadelphia, 85, 116; writes 
The Federalist, 85, 124, 143; 
sits in New York Constitu- 
tional Convention, 86, 124, 
273; Secretary of Treasury, 86, 
178, 276; Report on Public 
Credit, 180; founds Federalist 
Party, 88, 130, contest with 
Jefferson, 90; contact with 
France, 93, 133, 218, 283; con- 
tact with England, 94; puts 
down "Whiskey Rebellion," 95, 
191; election of Adams, 98; de- 
clines Senate appointment, 99; 
war threatened with France, 
100; heads Army, loi, 253, 259; 
breaks with Adams, 104, helps 
elect Jefferson, 105; defeats 
Burr in New York, 106; duel, 
107, 140; funeral, 295; com- 
pared with Peletiah Webster, 
xii, 113; immigrant, xv, great 
constructive genius, 23, 70; 
wrote Farewell Address, 220; 
leader of bar, 227; urged for 
Chief Justice, 229; pioneer in 
education, 268, 279 

Hamilton College, 278 

Hamilton Memorial Association, 

342 
Hammond, John Hays, quoted, 9 



350 



Sntiex 



Hammond, Minister, 94 
Harding, President, quoted, 347 
Henry, Patrick, 262, 304 
Herrick, Myron T., quoted, 70 
liibben, John G., quoted, 8 
Hill, D. J., quoted, 53 
Hillis, Newell Dwight, quoted, 8 
Hitchcock, Gilbert M., quoted, 10 
Hoover, Herbert, quoted, 201 ; 270 
Hopkins, E. G., quoted, 14 
"Horatius" essays, 219 
Howell, Clark, quoted, 32 
Hutchins, Harry B., quoted, 9 



I 



Implied powers of Constitution, 

87, 189, 196, 227, 322 
Internal improvements at public 

expense, 87, 196 
Iredell, Judge, 238 



Jackson, Andrew, 20, 339 

Jay, John, 95, 96, 103, 119, 163, 
209, 283 

Jay's Treaty, 95, 219 

Jefferson, Thomas, 14, 20, 32, 35, 
38, 39, 42, 44, 54, 58, 89, 90, 91, 
102, 103; opinion of Hamilton, 
104; 121, 187, 218, 234, 283, 
290, 310, 320, 330 

Johnson, Hiram W., quoted, 13 



K 



Kent, Chancellor, 232, 234, 235, 

274,315- 
"Kentucky Resolutions," 102, 

133 
King, Henry C, quoted, 8 
Knox, General, 100, 119, 250, 253 
Knox, Philander C, quoted, 9 



Lafayette, opinion of Washington, 

26, 313; 250, 254,339 
Lamont, T. W., quoted, 11 
Landis, Judge K. M., quoted, 47 
Lane, Franklin K., quoted, 8 



Lansing, Robert, quoted, 3 
Laurens, 1 1 1 , 250 
Lawson, Victor, quoted, 32 
League of Nations, 166, 285 
Lee, Robert E., 2,7, 60 
Lincoln, compared with Hamilton, 
152, 162, 282, 293, 305, 306, 

307. 313, 334 
"Little Sarah," case of, 93 
Lodge, Henry Cabot, quoted, 70 
Longfellow, 7 

Lowden, Frank O., quoted, 16 
Lowell's "Commemoration Ode" 

to Lincoln, 3, 16, 21 
Louisiana, acquisition of, 132, 257 

M 

McAdoo, W. G., statement re- 
garding statue of Hamilton, 340 
McCall, Samuel W., quoted, 49 
McCullough vs. Maryland, 229 
McHenry, James, opinion of 

Hamilton, 177 
McKinley, William, 142, 293 
McLaughlin, A. G., quoted, 13 
McRae, Milton W., quoted, 50 
MacCracken, John H., quoted, 27 
Madison, James, 89, 118, 122; 
contributed to "Federalist," 
144; 183, 188, 203, 216, 310; 
opinion of Hamilton, 336 
Manual on Practice of Law, by 

Hamilton, 225 
Manufactures, Report on, 195 
Marshall, John, 18, 39, 42, 58, 71, 

216, 229, 321, 339 
Marshall, Thomas R., quoted, 51 
Maryland ratified Constitution, 

126 
Massachusetts ratified Constitu- 
tion, 126 
"Meeting in The Fields," 77, no, 

129, 261 
Menocal, Mario G., quoted, 41 
Merchant Marine, 157 
Monmouth Court House, battle 

of, 249 
"Monroe Doctrine,'' 157, 285 
Monroe, James, 203, 286, 288, 312 
Morris, Gouverneur, 117, 122, 136, 
295 



351 



3lnbex 



Morris. Robert, 80. 82, 174, 175, 

179 
Moses, George H., quoted, 60 
Muhlenberg, 288, 290 



N 



National Banking System, 87, 
131- 175, 17S. i8i, 221 

Nelson, Knute, quoted, 9 

Neutrality Proclamation 93, 219, 
283 

Newburgh Rebellion, 82. loi, 266 

New England Separatist Move- 
m.ent. 140 

New Hampshire Grants. 268 

New Hampshire ratified Constitu- 
tion, 127 

* New Jersey Plan" for Constitu- 
tion, 117 

New Jersey ratified Constitution, 
126 

Nivelle, General, at grave of 
Roosevelt, 59 

Northern Confederacy, 105 

Noyes, Frank B., quoted, 27 



O 



Oliver's Essay on Hamilton, xvi. 
Osborn, Chase S., quoted, 15 



"Pacificus" Essays, 93, 219 

Parker, Alton B., quoted, 29 

Patent System, 196, 278 

Pennsylvania ratified Constitu- 
tion, 126 

Phillips, Wendell, 7 

"Phocion" Essays, 211 

Pinchot. Gifford, quoted, 57 

Pinckney, Charles, 253 

Pinckney. Thomas, 98 

Postal System. 278 

Presidential term, discussed by 
Hamilton, 168 

Proctor, Thomas Redfield, 280 

Public Credit. Report on, 180 

Publicity, Hamilton advocates, 82 

'■Publius' Essays, 144 

Putnam, Herbert, quoted, 3 



R 



Randolph, 188 

Rathom, John R., quoted, 17 
Reed, James A., quoted, 38 
Representation, Congressional 

basis of, 159 
Reynolds Case, 286 
Rhode Island, protest against 

taxation, 81 
Rhodes, J. P., quoted, 45 
Richmond, C. A., quoted, 14 
Robinson, Prof. E. E., quoted, 332 
Rockefeller, John, Jr., quoted, 11 
Roosevelt, Franklin, quoted, 36 
Roosevelt, Theodore, 5, 7, 11, 21, 

32, 45, 46, 50, 56, 57, 58, 59, 68, 

117, 153. 154-203,316,317,330 
Root, Elihu, quoted, 281 



"Shay's Rebellion." 83 
Shaw, Leslie M., quoted, 36 
Scott, W. D., quoted, 34 
Scripps, E. W., quoted, 44 
Sherman, L. Y., quoted, 8 
Sims, Admiral, quoted, 43 
Sinclair, Upton, quoted, 1 1 
Smith, H. L., quoted, 59 
Smith, Melancthon, 125, 129 
Smith, William Alden, quoted, 8 
Society of the Cincinnati, 120 
South Carolina ratifies Constitu- 
tion, 126 
Spargo, John, quoted, 1 1 
Spencer, Judge Ambrose, quoted, 

318 
Spencer, S. P., quoted, 32 
Sproul, W. C, quoted, 34 
Stoddard, Henry L., quoted, 9 
Story, Judge, 228 
Straus, Oscar S., quoted, 61 
Sumner's resolution on death of 

Lincoln, 9 
Suzzallo, Henry, quoted, 35 



Taft. William H., quoted, 44 
Tariff Protection, 87, 182, 196, 200 
Taxation, 87, 177, 188 



352 



Sntiex 



Taylor, Charles H., quoted, 46 
Thomas, Charles S., quoted, 24 
Tilden, Samuel J., 52, 68, 319 
Trade, Department of, 201 
Treasury, Department of, 86, 178, 

202, 205, 343 
Treat, Prof. P. J., quoted, 332 
Turner, F. J., quoted, 19 
Tyler, L. G., quoted, 30 

U 

Underwood, Oscar, quoted, 32 
University of New York, 268 



V 



Van Dyke, Henry, quoted, 45 
Van Tyne, Prof., poll of History 

Class, 58 
Venables, 288 
Versailles Treaty, 147, 274 
"Virginia Plan" for Constitution, 

117 

Virginia ratifies Constitution, 128 

W 

Wallace, Henry C, quoted, 57 

War casualties, 53 

Washington, George, meets Ham- 
ilton, 243, relations with Hamil- 
ton. 79; 89, 92, 93, 95, 118, 120, 
189, 221, 245, 246, 249, 250, 
254, 278, 284, Senate's grief on 



death of, 29- letter to Gov- 
ernors, 112, letter to Hamilton, 
204, his papers written by Ham- 
ilton, 210 compared with 
Hamilton, 281, 308, 313, 334 
Washington, locating city of, 186 
Washington's Farewell Address, 

143, 220, 285, 309 
Webster, Daniel, 18, 42, 50, 60, 68, 
129, opinion of Hamilton, 205; 
318. 339 
Webster, Pelatiah, xii. 
Weeks, John W., quoted, 38 
Welles announcement of Lincoln's 

death, 4 
West Point founded, 259, 278 
"Whiskey Rebellion," 95, 132, 

191, 252 
White, Stewart Edward, quoted, 

46 
W hite, William Allen, quoted, 5 
White Plains, Battle of, 244 
Wilson, James, 122 
Wilson, Woodrow, 21, 46, 60, 68, 

203, 206, 266, 274, 277, 285 
Williams, John Sharpe, quoted. 32 
Williams, Roger, 61, 68, 203 
Willis, Frank B., quoted, 23 
Wise, Rabbi, quoted, 23 
Wood, General, quoted, 45; 153 

X YZ 

"X. Y. Z. Papers," 100 
Yorktown, Battle of, 251 



353 



Ji Selection from the 
Catalogue of 

G. P. PUTNAM'S SONS 



Complete Catalogues sent 
on application 



" I bare known nearly all the marked men of my time, but I 
bare aerer known one equal to Hamilton, " — Talleyrand, 



Alexander Hamilton 

AN ESSAY ON AMERICAN UNION 

By FREDERICK SCOTT OLIVER 

8vo, over $00 Pages, with Portrait and Map 

"Adequately supplies a real want in political history. . . . 
A living portrait of the man himself is vigorously drawn in the 
midst of the historical and political chapters." — Frederick 
Harrison in London Tribune, 

A searching study and masterly presentment of 
the struggles of that critical period in American 
history which — thanks largely to the influence of 
Hamilton's potent personality — ended in a firm and 
enduring union of States which long threatened to 
remain jealous and discordant. 

It presents also a striking and authentic portrait 
of Hamilton the man ; it brings us to a right under* 
standing of him as one of the most illustrious statesmen 
of ancient or modem times ; it gives a just conception 
of the magnitude and solidity of his achievement ; it 
surrounds him with his friends and enemies ; and it 
sets him off against a panoramic background that 
could have been painted only by one who combined 
the artist's sense for the significant feature with an 
encyclopedic knowledge of the political history of the 
last quarter of the eighteenth and the opening years 
of the nineteenth century. 



Q. P. PUTNAM'S 50NS 
New York London 



6 ?» 7 .. 






,V' 



->^' 



,\\- ■■> 



- V 
3o 



.-iV 



-^<^ 



v\^' 



.^' 






''^^ v^^ 



aV-- 



O 



kO°< 



0^ 



•^^^' 



I 



oV' 



^^. 



-nO^Ia^- 










<. 






"•-<■. 









-^ 'aft 



^ 



,•0' 



<-■ 



>v^^^. 



^0 






'"^/. v^ 






0' 



* 8 1 A * \V ^ 



^^^ -^^^ 









v>\ 















" /■ . ''^O 



%:■ 












■gi- 






* ., V ■ ^O' 



.#' 
























"^/- v^ 



.1-i' 






a\^' 






^O 



■"00'^ 



G 



0' 



